E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSA tale of two Senates on display last night… Obama’s dinner with 12 GOP senators vs. Rand Paul’s filibuster… Paul’s filibuster actually forces a debate… Principle vs. politics… Obama’s dinner gets positive reviews, but it raises three questions… And Obama follows that dinner with lunch with Paul Ryan and Chris Van Hollen… And Messina defends OFA.
*** A tale of two Senates: On a day when much of Washington was snowed in -- or rained/slushed in, as it turned out -- we saw a night of contrasts among Republican senators. On the one hand, President Obama dined with 12 GOP senators at a fancy boutique hotel, where they talked about ways to end the budget impasse between Democrats and Republicans. It was a hat tip to the “good old days” that many folks in DC claim existed but sometimes is exaggerated. On the other hand, there was Rand Paul, who was later joined by some of his colleagues, mounting a nearly 13-hour old-school filibuster against Obama’s pick to head the CIA due to the administration’s drone policy. In many ways, it was a tale of the Old Senate vs. the New Senate. One was warm and cordial, behind closed doors, and attended by those who have had a history of working across the aisle; the other was boisterous, great for TV, and largely fueled by the Tea Party (Paul, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz). To be sure, there were some key exceptions to this dynamic: Tea Party Sen. Ron Johnson joined the Obama dinner, while a Democratic senator (Oregon’s Ron Wyden) took part in the Paul filibuster. Still, the contrast was striking, and it highlighted the two tensions inside the U.S. Senate -- the desire to work together and the desire to hold things up, whatever the reason.
Charles Dharapak / AP
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., walks off the floor of the Senate to applause after his filibuster of the nomination of John Brennan to be CIA director on Capitol Hill, early Thursday, March 7, 2013.
*** Marathon Man: Say what you will about Rand Paul’s marathon filibuster -- whether it was a noble cause, a vanity project with 2016 overtones, or a protest over a hypothetical -- but it makes the case for filibuster reform requiring senators to actually SPEAK if they want to hold things up. Why? Because it truly forced a debate, in this case over the administration’s drone policy targeting terrorists. Just look at the conversation it started. And compare that with yesterday’s other filibuster, against Obama judicial nominee Caitlin Halligan, whose nomination was blocked without a marathon speaking performance. Guess what: We know a lot more about the administration’s drone policy than why Halligan shouldn’t serve on the D.C. Circuit. (Apparently, the reason for the filibuster against Halligan had to do with the NRA and gun manufacturers.) As the New York Times Gail Collins writes, “Would any Republican have spent a night fending off hunger, thirst and the need for bathroom breaks to stop Halligan’s nomination? We’ll never know. All McConnell had to do was just say no. Harry Reid, the majority leader, needed 60 votes to proceed. End of story. End of Halligan.”
*** Principle vs. politics: We’ll say one more thing about Paul’s filibuster last night: We’re pretty sure he would have mounted it against a Republican White House, too. (Remember how his father, Ron, railed against the Bush administration’s Iraq war. When it comes to issues that civil libertarians hold near and dear, the Pauls are true believers.) But can you say the same about the other Republicans who participated in the filibuster? Would they have blasted a Republican administration’s drone policy? After all, some of these senators agree with the policy. It was fascinating how some Republican senators seemed to wait to see which way the wind was Tweeting before climbing aboard. We’ll let others guess the motivations some had (2016 was in the air for some, 2014 for others, nabbing a piece of the spotlight for themselves for others). But this was Rand Paul’s moment, no matter how many others tried to climb aboard his bandwagon.
*** Obama’s dinner gets positive reviews, but it raises three questions: As for Obama’s dinner last night, it went very well, according to various NBC conversations with the GOP participants. It was serious. It was respectful. And it was informative. (In fact, one senator told us that he learned, for the first time, the actual cuts that the president has put on the table. Leadership hadn’t shared that list with them before) And the overall suggestion from the dinner was that Obama would have to give cover for any cuts to Medicare, while Republicans would have to pony up additional revenue to get it. But here are the questions no one was able to answer: How do you get to the next step? How do these talks become legislation? And after working around leadership, how do you bring them back into the fold to ultimately try to pass any deal? A final point: You can tell that last night’s dinner had new Chief of Staff Denis McDonough’s fingerprints on it. Yes, the expansive dinner was Sen. Lindsey Graham’s idea, and the guest list was also his. But don’t forget that McDonough had a great relationship with Graham (and McCain) when he served as Obama’s deputy national security adviser. Oh, want more evidence the damage the sequester debate had on Obama? He has just a 45%-46% approval rating in the latest Quinnipiac poll.
*** Last night’s dinner followed by Obama’s lunch with Paul Ryan: And after last night’s dinner, NBC News has confirmed that Obama is having lunch today at 12:25 pm ET with House Budget Committee Chairman (and failed VP nominee) Paul Ryan at the White House. NBC’s Frank Thorp has confirmed that Ryan’s Democratic counterpart, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, will also attend the lunch. Per Politico, “The idea for the chat-and-chew came during an extended phone conversation between Obama and Ryan earlier this week... By speaking directly with Ryan, Obama is hoping to enlist a powerful ally in convincing leadership to abandon its insistence on subjecting all future measures on the debt, deficit, taxes and entitlement reform to "regular order," the tortuous committee process dominated by party conservatives, according to a person close to the process.”
*** Messina defends OFA: After President Obama’s Organizing of Action has receiving plenty of criticism -- including from us -- for offering potential access to big donors, former Obama Campaign Manager Jim Messina writes a CNN op-ed trying to soften the criticism. He states that Organization for Action is an issue advocacy group, not an electoral one (he even uses the phrase “social welfare” group); he argues that it will disclose all of its donors on a quarterly basis; and he contends that the organization won’t accept donations from corporations, federal lobbyists, or foreign donors. As for the access, Messina adds, “But just as the president and administration officials deliver updates on the legislative process to Americans and organizations across the ideological spectrum, there may be occasions when members of Organizing for Action are included in those updates. These are not opportunities to lobby -- they are briefings on the positions the president has taken and the status of seeing them through.” In other words, these folks will be able to meet with the president. Here’s another thing to consider: While OFA won’t take corporate money, nothing is there to stop, say, a particular CEO from writing a $500,000 check. This op-ed was clearly intended to calm down the critics, but other than eliminating the possibility of corporate donors, it doesn’t get to the larger criticism that campaign-finance advocates are upset about.
*** The end justifying the means: The larger question this op-ed doesn’t answer is why does the president, when presented with a campaign finance fork in the road, always take the one that is the “ends justifies the means” course. By creating and supporting an organization like this, the president is setting a precedent for future presidents to go around their own political parties when searching for support and they are only contributing to what everyone from BOTH 2012 campaigns claim is a problem: the growing role of big money in politics.
Click here to sign up for First Read emails.
Text FIRST to 622639, to sign up for First Read alerts to your mobile phone.
Check us out on Facebook and also on Twitter. Follow us @chucktodd, @mmurraypolitics, @DomenicoNBC, @brookebrower
This story was originally published on Thu Mar 7, 2013 9:11 AM EST
Leave a Comment:
Was good to see President Obama dining with Congress and collaborating. That is what we do in the real world; negotiate to reach common ground.
A 50 state study by JAWA is being published in the Boston Globe this morning saying that states with the most restrictive gun laws have fewer deaths from guns then those that are more promiscuous. This is not a surprise to many, but to those gun nuts that cling to their AK-47s it will be a devastating blow to them. A knock out to those owners of Glocks that think owning a gun makes them safer. Quite frankly they are not. Of course being in the NRA induced insanity mode, they will probably be in denial.
Rand Paul Huffed and Puffed for Nearly 13 hours Until he Finally Got to A Leak
Republicans are afraid of drones; but not assault weapons killing citizens daily? How asinine.
Rand Paul primary intent is to feign scare tactics from an imagined dictatorial, terrorist, president aka President Obama and to prevent him from causing more collateral damage American interests.
What kind of answer could possibly soothe Rand Paul and the other Tea Suckers?
Does Ran Paul have any objections to the number of anti-government "patriot" groups, including paramilitary hate organizations which have reached an all-time high in 2012, fanned by President Barack Obama's reelection and talk of gun control following the Newtown, Conn., elementary school massacre?
Paul said..."I will speak as long as it takes, until the alarm is sounded from coast to coast that our Constitution is important. Are we so complacent with our rights that we would allow a president to say he might kill Americans?"
The real collateral damage to American interests is Rand Paul and his cohorts hating President Obama more than they love America! What he, Tea Suckers, and the GOP really are afraid of is a Black guy in the White House.
Recall that the Bush administration scrambled F-16s to stop the September 11, 2001 attack on the Pentagon, even if an American citizen were among the perpetrators. President Eisenhower sent federal troops to Little Rock, Arkansas to put down a rebellion that was intent on preventing nine black students from enrolling at Central High School. In 1962, President Kennedy sent federal troops to Oxford, Mississippi to quell the uprising by white Supremacists determined to prevent James Meredith from enrolling at at the Univ. of Mississippi. In 1963, JFK also sent federal troops to put the Black uprising in Birmingham, AL that erupted in response to the murder of 4 little girls. in 1967 LBJ sent federal troops to Detroit to put down Black rebellion. Waco, TX was under Bill Clinton.
And then there was Military Operation on Urban Terrain used in Los Angeles to quell the Rodney King riots.
But, as we rational human beings know this would not satisfy them. Rand Paul and his cohorts intents are to display how unhappy they are with a Black Man being in the White House. They want to destroy a fine man's legacy. Therefore, they will obstruct and delay in hopes of swaying public opinion with their feigned scare tactics.
Is that not enough reason to use force for these bigots? Of course it isn't; bigots have no concern for Blacks and minorities.
Cut and paste Beverly - part of the usual ilk that spills the talking points out here instead of logically discussing. Where are the other paid hacks?
Hat's off to Jim Croce. "You don't tug on Superman's cape. You don't spit in the wind. You don't pull the mask off that old Lone Ranger. And you don't mess around with Jim." Mr. Croce must have never run into a Caesar Augustus, or a White Collar Auto, or a Ben-lotsanumbers, or he'd sure as hell have added....And you don't ever argue with right-wingers.
You don't argue with people who create a world that replaces debate with third-grade taunts. You don't argue with people who create a world that has no foundation in reality. You don't argue with people who deny facts and refuse to admit error. You don't argue with people who say they hate something, but can't stay away from it.
So it is with Morgs74 AKA Spanky, a misogynist who can't stay away from First Read. Morgs74 lies and when called out, he runs away. He doesn't have the courage to admit his mistakes. He "redacts" his lies. That's what pretend lawyers do. They don't retract like real lawyers and they never apologize for lying under any circumstances. To do that is to admit error, like Bill O'Reilly who screamed at Alan Colmes that he was lying. No matter that Colmes was telling the truth and O'Reilly was lying. His audience doesn't deal in facts.
The world of lies provides great comfort to Ben-lotsanumbers, too. He joins in the slander/libel parade. Colmes is a liar he says, even as he sucks up O'Reilly's lies. Ben is outraged that we don't share his concern about Sen. Menendez, an outrage based on more lies, something that never happened. So, Ben bears false witness, to hell with facts. No matter, the god who tells Ben not to bear false witness loves him sooooo much, it's OK to lie. What a guy his god is.
Caesar Augustus also hates First Read so much, he has to come back day after day. CA is the stuff that makes you shudder when you scrape it off your shoes. Once upon a time he was Mixed Bag, but he just couldn't resist the urge to come here. You'd rather have AIDS than accidentally brush against him. This is the guy who can close his posts by saying - Jesus loves you. There is a Biblical admonition that says judgment is the province of God, but really.....if there's a hell, this guy is headed there at Mach 3.
White Collar Auto runs. WCA says he doesn't read these posts, so there's no point in asking him how union thugs bested his buddies in the executive suites or in the boardrooms. He's been asked at least ten times and can't answer the question, so he runs. He can't answer any reasonable questions for that matter.
So it is in their world, a world that includes Boehners, Cantors, Ryans, McConnells, and Cornyns who cannot tell the truth, who blame the poor for evil, and love the rich for their noble hearts. It includes Robertsons and Falwells who claim to have a direct line to a god; a god they created.
They belong in the netherworld of "ignore". We can deal with some of that problem today. The rest we banish in November, 2014. We can, we should, and we must. You don't feed disease. You wipe it out.
Yesterday ADP reported that 198,000 jobs were added in February.
Today the BLS reported that the weekly First Time Unemployment claims dropped 7,000 to a 5 year low. Additionally there was a decline of 362,000 people claiming benefits.
Thanks to sequester 2 months from now the numbers will be moving in the opposite direction.
I keep telling you that! ;op!
Your FR experience will be all the more pleasurable if you "ignore" these trolls
Don't allow them to drop you down to their level of stupidity only to beat you with their experience!
They are not hear to have an honest debate, they swoop in poop all over the place and then run away.
Notice how they can NEVER post a stand alone comment? They are only capable of riding a liberals original thoughts...
My personal "ignore author" group is reserved for the truly egregious offenders.
(In fact, one senator told us that he learned, for the first time, the actual cuts that the president has put on the table. Leadership hadn't shared that list with them before)
Well, maybe if they listened to President Obama, they would know what he has offered. This is such crap. Everybody else in the world seems to know what he offered.
To think, they're United States Senators.
Seems like they're trying to water down gun regulations. They want to take away safety net programs. They want to continue to throw money at Defense when it isn't needed. They're into voter suppression. They don't want to upset their wealthy donors nor the tea party and will literally throw everybody to the wolves in order not to lose their re-election.
So what if they lose a few points in their polling? At least they can say they did good things while they served in government. They can't say that now that's for sure.
Good luck President Obama believing in these people. You are a better person than I.
Well said David, but it could have been summed up in one sentence. Names, plus a waste of human skin. Short but accurate. As my dad would say, as he did about Reagan, these people are not worth the powder to blow them to billy hell. Where by the way they would be rejected.
Yeah, I love the psoters who complain about this site. Apparently, they've gotta eat a mile of sh&t just to form an opinion on the flavor.
Hey, WCA, what union was responsible for the decision to build the Chevy Caprice? Whatta piece of excrement! And, in the early 70's, then-chairman Jim Roche described planned obsolescence (that incredible ability a GM car had to fall apart right after the last payment was made) in a national news magazine as "another word for progress." What union do you wanna blame for THAT?!!
TexasT-2966501
Cut and paste Beverly - part of the usual ilk that spills the talking points out here instead of logically discussing. Where are the other paid hacks?
TexasT,
What objections do you have to the truth? In case you aren't in the loop of things and would like to know where the real hacks are; look no further than you right wing nutty cohorts who post here daily.
Please note the picture of Rand Paul, who said he would filibuster until he couldn't talk any more. Good grief. Is it possible he was telling the truth? Is he using sign language? I'm not exactly versed in signing, but I believe that sign says, "Damn, I had no idea you people were stupid enough to sit around and listen to 13 hours of BS.
I remember a scene from a movie (can't remember the name of the movie) where Bette Davis played this snobby rich lady. Maggie Smith played her maid. They were in the lobby of some beautiful hotel and Bette Davis turns to Maggie Smith and asks - what time is it? Maggie Smith looks at her and points and says - there's a clock right there - why do you look at it?
Republicans can't be bothered to find out what President Obama is willing to negotiate. Instead they have to be catered to. Who do they think they are?
Rand Paul thinks he's Jimmy Stewart from "Mr Smith Goes To Washington". What a clown show this nut job is. "Going to filibuster till I can't talk anymore". Now, wouldn't that be a blessing (especially if it becomes permanent. Here's hoping.) When are these fanatical TeaBaggers going to grow up and begin working for our Country and not just for their egos. Hurry up so we can get rid of these clowns.
Glad to see our President reach out to some of the Republicans at dinner last night. Let's hope it does some good.
Anybody see this one yet:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/5/email-tells-feds-make-sequester-painful-promised/
Obama sabotaging the country in an attempt not to look so foolish on his fear mongering over the sequester. It isn't working.
Great descriptive round-up of the crazies who post here David.
Maybe those descriptions are fitting for some members of the elected TeaPeople.
President Obama has to deal with real 'elected' liars, crazies.
David, whenever I'm tempted to argue with those types I think of the quote (I believe it's Mark Twain) that says you should never argue with stupid people. They'll drag you down to their level and beat you with experience. Ignoring them kills the temptation.
It appears as though democrats are scolding Obama for his doom and gloom prophesy before the sequester according to the Hill. Obama overplayed his hand and now looks like a buffoon... but when has that ever changed? All this bluster about how the country is going to fall apart was nothing more than political pandering courtesy of the awkward president trying to make his case against republicans.
What I find most amazing about this is how the lefty liberals all hooked on Obama's coat tails and followed along merrily without thinking for themselves. That doesn't surprise me, lefty liberals do it all the time... blindly following Obama where ever he decides to take them... His group of willing followers would support him no matter what... no matter how wrong he is... no matter how much a fool he looks like and the happy liberals seem to enjoy being made fools of as well.
An excellent article today in NYT on the so-called entitlements. For those that missed it I'll link below. Lots of good info on how to shore up Social Security. One thing missing is solutions to the Medicare shortfall. For decades the tax that pays for that hasn't been increased. The Republicans will tell you that's a burden young workers shouldn't have to shoulder with increases today. Really? When they go to retire and need that medical care is the cost of healthcare going to be two-thirds cheaper then? We need to raise the Medicare tax now so they WILL have coverage that's paid for in the future. We also need to address the shortfalls the program is facing today. The sooner - the better.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/03/06/the-war-on-entitlements/?hp
Touched a nerve, did I Bev? Truth = written opinions by paid partisans in your mind, not factual reporting and honest debate. I can't help you if your eyes are blind to the difference.
I hold equal disregard for those "cohorts" as you refer to them, who cut and paste their hack-job opinions from the other side just as much.
Civil discourse will restore this country back to health and away from its present volatile, polarized state.
TexasT-2966501
Perhaps you would care to point out all the cut and pastes?
btw, you have like all who post here an account into which pennies dribble ... you are also a paid hack.
Rand Paul:
I don't always take over C-Span, but when I do, people actually watch C-Span.
Yeah David Walker - I guess his discourse about using drones to kill Americans on American soil is exactly what you would call foolish talk. Could it be that you support Obama, Holder and Brennen in their quest to circumvent the Constitution and the right to trial? Come on, admit it... you want to see the drones hovering over an American and firing it's missiles... leaving a vapor trail and that great explosion as it finds it's target... I'm sure your wish would be that it kills a conservative, or a tea party member... eh? What say you? Admit it... Nothing would make you happier... Forget the fact that Rand was filibustering to bring out the point that Brennen supports this... Since you feel Rand was wrong... you have to side with Obama on this... Let's kill Americans on our soil... Nothing could ever go wrong with that idea... eh?
Great first thoughts my liberal friends.
Pat Boston, the fact that a legislator had no idea what President Obama had proposed often shows a level of purposeful ignorance that does not belong in the House or Senate. All that legislator had to do was access the White House web site, and listen to President Obama's speeches. Willful ignorance at best, lazy and uninterested at worst.
Texas T, too bad republicans turned President Obama's many invitations to socialize for the first four years! I give them credit for finally accepting this one but wonder why it took them so long.
But then you all would have considered the filibuster awesome and heroic too.
Word to the wise: there is no right/left politics. There is only an ambidextiry of tyranny. When a politician comes along who breaks that mold, the people, in their own best interest, ought to follow suit.
FR, with more false equivalencvy crappola:
An even larger question is why the beltway media demands that progressives disarm unilaterally while they raised scarcely a whimper over the far right Supreme Court's disgusting Citizens United decision that opened the floodgates to corporate money. More highly selective outrage from "impartial" "journalists."
It really comes as no surprise the senator is clueless. And for every clueless republican senator, there has to be 30 clueless republican house representatives. Apparently, they watch O'Reilly over on Faux as their source for the presidents position vs. actually reading the White House web site or asking their leadership. Perhaps these clueless had, for the first time, a door opened for them, that allows them to clearly see their failed leaders, Boehner in the House, and McConnell in the Senate have been hiding the facts and painting Obama as the boogeyman vs. a strong leader and compromiser.
And thank you haggisbingo-lotsanumbers for pointing the finger back at yourself. ?stupider? Really??
LMAO
I cannot for the life of me understand why Obama would choose Bush's Drone & Torture guy to head the CIA. Like many other progressives, I thought we were galloping away from the Bush administration, not absorbing it. Here in the U.S. we have no use for drones to target American citizens--we have constitutional protections and the rules of law enforcement. Like the LAPD, the police can simply burn suspects to death when they fail to actually arrest them.
People will regret being soft on this issue when someone like Bush is once again elected president and gathers up all the powers that were given to Obama. All people have to protect them in this society are their civil rights and civil liberties. And we should ensure that we have a TRANSPARENT govt that does not operate with SECRET LAWS.
That's funny - hasn't this poster been screaming for days now about fear mongering over sequester cuts? Now, suddenly, the poor thing can't define 'fear mongering'. Last I checked, a lot of people are denied a trial - especially those that engage the police in a shoot out and draw the short end of the stick in that fight.
DingleB,
The FAA announced this morning that over 160 airport towers will close next month. Three in my area, PNE, Lancaster, and New Castle. Do you think that will make our country more or less safe? How about the thousands of employees that will lose their jobs? How about the trickle down effect on airport personnel, restaurants, flight schools, etc., etc.?
In my opinion, you have to be very partisan not to believe that these cuts will not have a tremendous negative impact just when the economy is turning around.
Bev actually does have a point...and it's part of the adult conversation on the subject of drones that needs to be had.
We're talking about the government using a drone to kill one of its own citizens on its own soil with no due process...no charges and no trial. On face value, it's wrong.
...but do we have any issues with a state trooper shooting and killing someone who opens fire on that trooper? Again, there are no charges and no trial so no due process.
...and do we take issue with the man in his home who shoots and kills the guy who broke into his home? That person again got no due process...no charges and no trial.
On some level, these are all related.
Good luck trying to get people to listen to that Dingle, those of us who are truly independent/libertarian etc have been saying this for years, very few can see beyond a D or a R
This Writer’s “Ignore This Author” Button is on Fire!!!
David Walker
Ms. Redhead
Johntho
Auntie Fascist
Chilled
RTFS
We now interrupt this program for the following message:
“Thank you all for these comments today. This is the best thing that could happen to First Read. My 'Ignore This Author' button is on Fire today!!!.”
TomasGrande
Salud
Republicans will never be able to trust Obama, as everything he does is for political gains and not for what is in the best interest of the country. The fact they are trying to make sequester cuts as painful as possible is just more proof and people are waking up to his tactics. The Brown Email says it all, don't do what is right do what we said would happen. Obama wants the country to suffer for political gain and his spending addiction. Higher taxes and more spending is the Democrat answer to everything.
From: Brown, Charles S - APHIS
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 1:20 PM
To: [redacted]
Cc: [redacted]
Subject: FW: Aquaculture loss - sequestration
All,
During the Management team conference call this morning, I asked if there was any latitude in how the sequestration cuts related to aquaculture could be managed (e.g. spread across the Region).
The question was elevated to APHIS BPAS. The response back was, "We have gone on record with a
notification to Congress and whoever else that "APHIS would eliminate assistance to producers
in 24 States in managing wildlife damage to the aquaculture industry, unless they provide funding to cover the costs. "So, it is our opinion that however you manage that reduction, you need to make sure you are not contradicting what we said the impact would be." I have been asked to provide a plan by Friday that will outline the implement of the $263,000 aquaculture reduction. I will use the information you have already provided. If I need additional information, I will let you know.
Charlie
Charles S. Brown
Eastern Regional Director USDA - APHIS - Wildlife Services
920 Main Campus Drive
Suite 200
Raleigh, NC 27606
919-855-7198 office
919-855-7215 fax
Red -
Logic dictates then that for every clueless Republican House Representative there must be tens of thousands of clueless Republican constituents who are uninformed of the facts as well.
From the Article:
Starting to understand why the President went around the leadership in this case. Kind of sad that the leadership is asking them for a vote without providing the full details to his group.
On the other hand, this is Washington, and we know that people don't sit down and read the entire proposal before voting on it.
Oh, Rick, just stop it. Not a single person could give me an answer on how that e-mail translates to "Make The Cuts Hurt" when I asked the question yesterday. Not one.
Bev In Chicago - What is that black mans Democratic party doing to those poor black kids in Chicago. Blacks make up 41.8 % of the schools. Of the 82 school closing 88% of the closed schools are black. 400 MILLION stolen from education last year and another 287 MILLION this year to pay of the stolen Union Pensions. Democrats, the ones really destroying the Black Race! And Arne Duncans worried about teachers getting laid off with the sequester, how laughable!
Silver Flyer
You're changing the subject and ignoring the fact that the administration is intentionally making the cuts more painful than necessary to prove a point.
Regarding the sequester though, there is probably a smarter way to cut spending, but our leaders have clearly shown that they are incapable of doing so. The sequester is the next best option.
David Walker - Nice rant. Makes me smile that I get under your skin so much you need to dedicate a paragraph to me. I called you out about defending the sequester, you replied, and I change my stance, you don't defend, you are just complacent in what the left does. That is even worse you spineless tool. Keep getting your marching orders.
but but but, this is the only way we can get military cut so lefties are ok with it now. You evolved I am sure but that is good. moderate thinking is the only way we will get through this debacle. you extremists on both sides need to be reigned in.
BTW, please place me on ignore. I will continue to call you out, make you look the fool, everyone will continue to laugh behind your back and you can just continue on with life being a miserable slug. Sad life some of you live.
I'll bite. Fear mongering? A descriptive portrayal of what a drone does is now considered fear mongering by lefty liberals. How would you describe the targeting of drones Dev? What words would you put in their place? Something romantic? How about something otherworld? I couldn't even imagine the phrases you'd come up with. I'm sure you have browsed Dumb Guy's Wordsmithing catalogue so what did you buy this time? I'd love to have a great laugh.
Of course you have followed the typical liberal path... and have ignored Obama's words on how he wants to use drones on Americans on American soil... keep that head buried in the sand.
@ 1SGFitzsWife4ID #1.33
Amen Brother!
Silver Flyer
One of the airports that's going to close its control tower is Sugarland, a wealthy suburb of Houston. The airport is heavily used by private corporate jets and the local economy is expected to take a major hit because of it. Fat cat CEOs may like it that Republicans are protecting the tax loopholes for their corporate jets. They might not like it so well when they have to fly their expensive toys into airports with inadequate flight control as a consequence of the budget cuts that are necessitated in part to compensate for the special tax treatment they get. Not even big shot CEOs can escape from arithmetic.
Democrats take 687 MILLION out of Illinois public schools in 2 YEARS, and not one Idiot liberal on this board is upset? FRICKIN MORONS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
1SGFitzsWife4ID
But some people -those capable of critical thought- are slowly coming around. The rest of them will "ignore" anybody who presents an idea which is contrary to what they think they know. They can't be helped.
Da Noid
On some level they are related, but here's where it becomes a bit different.
With law enforcement (police, etc) they are usually enforcing the law or attempting to stop a crime in progress. Usually they have probable cause in these situations. Someone defending his home also gets the benefit of the doubt in most cases unless we have sufficient evidence to suggest that he just invited someone else into his house to shoot them.
The issue with the drones is that in most cases is that they can easily bypass probable cause and due process. The easiest way to frame the question for me is to ask it this way: Are you comfortable with the Obama administration's stance on using drones to possibly kill Americans without due process? Would that same comfort level work back to previous administrations? How about future administrations?
In my mind, with most Americans, it's easy to say just use due process. Obtain the warrants and go. This isn't a situation like Die Hard where people are being held hostage in a skyscraper, we have plans for that. This is about the possibility of using unmanned aircraft to kill an American Citizen where no due process was required. No warrant. No arrest. No attempt for peaceful capture. Just a hellfire missile, a dead body, and possibly collateral damage.
This isn't the police trying to arrest someone who pulls a gun and fires at them. This is the government bypassing law enforcement with intent to kill an American Citizen. Even if they do not intend to and never use it, by setting this precedent someone in the future could use it against our citizens.
That's where I have the problem.
@Dingle - At some point I really have to debate with myself on voting for the lessor of two evils, or voting for my party (pure waste of vote).
DCIA - that is proven daily on FR. Just look at what they would have us believe. Gun background checks is really code for allowing drone strikes on the home of anyone owning an assault gun. Repeated claims the deficit is growing, yet it is shrinking. Obama is an Oreo born in Kenya. The list is endless.
edgarw,
Right. If you want to look at who blindly follows whom, it's right up there in FirstThoughts. Since you don't bother to read [but would rather blindly follow along behind a certain Fox, sniffing its butt], I will copy the quote for you here:
David Walker,
I'm disappointed in you for not having included edgarw (AKA BrianB) in your list of idiots. You could do an entire column on that guy.
Morgs74
Making people angry is what trolls live for. At least you're honest enough to admit you're one.
It's about time they closed. Most small airport towers are not needed. Towers handle ground control. I'm sure that these airports only have a couple of flights taking off on a daily basis so in reality, the staffing and services are a waste of money. All airport activity in small airports can be handled by regional air traffic control. They aren't talking about shutting down any regional offices... when they do, there might be a problem... but not until then.
Want and justified are have two different meanings. Pull your head out of the sand and read a dictionary.
Lil Michelle
It often makes me wonder how the voting dynamic would be if people would actually just vote for their party (or rather, the candidate they prefer) over the lesser of two evils.
I think we all know the feeling of voting for the lesser or two evils. Who do I not hate as much? Gets rather amusing and might lead to a lot of empty/none of the above votes.
Lil Michelle,
Your vote is wasted when you don't vote for the party of your choice. Ask yourself how many others of your political leanings do the same thing. You claim to be a Libertarian. Vote that way, your voice is not heard when you chose a 'lesser of' option.
GEO, ALL OF US ARE UPSET BUT YOU SPEAK SO LOUDLY WE CAN'T GET A WORD IN OVER YOU!!!!!
I have to disagree with you on this one, my friend.
Ed's is either a re-reg of Kirk the Jerk or his twin brother! ☺
Silver Flyer:
Now wait. how can there be affects via trickle down only on cuts but not going the other way on prosperity? The left is the party of "trickle down economics don't work" so if someone started that airport, employed those support staff, businesses started up to support the support staff and on down, how can it be that they will suffer?
Remember the old adage, what goes up, must come down.
Lil Michelle
The lesser of two evils is still evil, and the only wasted vote is one in which you don't vote your principles. Back when wars were actually fought against tyranny and for freedom, people died so that we could have the freedom to vote. I'm not ever wasting that vote on big government, partisan, mainstream, nanny-statist political hacks, no matter which color they are.
Houston!
Laying out facts immediately pisses people when they have no rebuttal. All they can do it tow the party line and defect to essays which displays their hatred of different opinions. Why even comment if you can't argue your point? I have the same views as many of you on the left pertaining to abortion, legalization, immigration, same sex marriage but since I don't follow your rules about being all in or all out you piss yourself. Well, that is exactly what is wrong with America today. You tools can't think for yourself. You have one mold, if you don't fit in it you are out. I thought the left was the part of inclusion, for the people, for new ideas, well your true face has been shown. And you think the right likes to exclude?
I think MSNBC forgot the 3rd side of the Senate, Harry Reid and the do nothing Left wing Dem's.
edgarw:
I really don't have time to waste on people like you, but let's start with this. You write:
Don't come here guessing. Read this link. Take two Xanax, and lighten up on the hysteria: http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/05/politics/obama-drones-cia/index.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+rss%2Fcnn_allpolitics+%28RSS%3A+Politics%29
Foolish talk is the crap you are spewing, like this:
No. Additionally, your ridiculous question is based on a ridiculous hypothetical. But, about that right to trial, perhaps you'd address the detainees at Gitmo, who are neither prisoners of war, nor charged with violations of U.S. law. I mean, what with your concern for the law and all, surely that is causing you some grief.
Adding to your credentials as a certifiable low-intellect right-wing crazy you write:
You could try something new. You could read AND comprehend. I have posted repeatedly that military drones - drones of any kind, as a matter of fact - are unacceptable in U.S. air space. You could check that out, but that would be kind of like work, and you might have to think.
While I would be quite angry if a drone were used to kill a conservative person or even a Teabagger, I must admit, if one of them took you out, I wouldn't complain.
To show there is no limit to your ignorance, you write:
There was no danger of my forgetting that Paul was filibustering to bring out the point that Brennan (Come on, you can at least spell his name correctly, can't you?) supports these drone strikes on American soil. Brennan has said no such thing. Only someone as crazy as you can remember something that didn't happen. Paul was completely off the mark. So, on that score Paul was wrong. Hardly a first.
Now, if you want to guess, go play guessing games. This is a forum for facts. You don't seem to have any.
I read it Jack. I read the article before I started reading the inane posts from the liberals. Of course they all place their liberal/progressive spin on things. It's so typical of you liberals to deny anything you've done once you've been caught at it. You were all so supportive of Obama's doom and gloom campaign speeches before the sequester set in... now you are just like Obama... backtracking... so my statement of how you follow along behind him blindly stands.
Who is Brianb? I see you so boldly call me an idiot, but you simply can't fathom truth. You can't even defend yourself for supporting Obama and his desire to use drones against Americans on American soil... I haven't heard you say Obama is wrong about this. You can't. Hard to say much when your head is buried so deeply.
He is wrong about this, idiot. Satisfied?
But I'll say it again--you can't read. If you could, you would see that many liberal posters on this site take the President to task for one thing or another, and that's the difference between us and FoxButts.
Feisty corrected me. Apparently you are Kirk in disguise. Both of you are sub-intellectuals.
David Walker
Again, rather defend a suspected terrorist than its own people. Disgusting.
Morgs @ #1.60 and edgarw, this whole thread is dedicated to the left regulars patting each other on the back and complimenting each other on their sheer genius when it comes to the happenings/politics of the day. Any differing opinion is NOT subject to debate or discussion (as Feisty stated above she would like it to be but she is the worst offender of shutting said debate off with piss off comments) because it is immediately shut down with writings such as David's.
Point? Look at the many FR threads in which Feisty, Pig, Bev, and others, are lead off with a snide remark about the other side. And we are the "sh!t and run" side of the discussion? How many times to they leave after the first page and having had their ego adequately massaged, not return on subsequent pages? How many times do we see Seeking come in at the end of a thread late in the day to call someone and idiot, a moron, a basement dweller, nut, uninformed and the list goes on and on. It is not that we cannot engage in real debate and discussion, it is that this is their world and they make it as difficult as they can by first throwing up the wall when they are called out and the other side just MAY make sense.
Go to the story on FR about Hilary being the front runner for 2016. You will see none of them on the first five pages. They migrate to stories where they can put down the other side, wait for people who believe in that side to arrive, and proceed with the back patting and "good one Feisty" or "excellent post whoever.
I come here to defend and sometimes try to enlighten on the other side of an issue. More times than not, I am either on ignore (because I have made sense in the past and they can't stand it) or those that do respond, reply in the ways I spelled out above.
It's sad but, that's the way it is. They will not change and nothing you can say will make that happen. We can only plug away and point out our views (opposing or even in agreement sometimes) and hope that we can occasionally get a true rebuttal and more than one liners about our education, heritage, or standing in life.
Jack in Portsmouth -
Smartest thing I have ever heard from you. Too bad things have to be this egregious for you to raise an eye brow.
I can hear your outrage from here, it is truly heartfelt. This is how you show your outrage, you need to be called out on it first.
Morgs74
What you and others like you can never figure out is your generalization is completely wrong.
Democrats are very diverse in their opinions, whereas, Conservatives are the ones that goose-step together with one message.
This is the damaging diatribe repeated constantly by Rush and Faux sNewzzzzz and you bite on it hook, line and sinker.
Salud
TexasT-2966501
TexasT, your responses are laughable.
First of all, you attacked by calling me a hack. Is that civil? Then you accuse me of using someone's opinion and believing it as if I'm not allowed to form my own. I remain resolute in this drone conversation.
When that al Queda guy was killed I personally felt he was treasonous and deserved what he got. Let's get serious. Who is going to halt a plane or drone to apply the rule of law. The way I see it, I'm no Constitutional scholar either, but do object to the trolls left and right who are unhappy they cannot tell this brilliant President what to do; simply because it's what they think or want. He is not their House Boy. BTW: those trolls are the ones getting paid.
President Obama has kept US safe. I get very disgusted when the left trolls give right wing nut jobs the fodder they need to attack our President. But, that's the beauty of the 1st amendment.You people have been after President even before he took the Oath of Office.
Att Eric Holder, another accomplished Black man, has been a torn in the right's side. Fast & Furious fizzled out. Now the right wants to hold him accountable for a key nomination??? That is obstruction and bigotry as I see.
Att Eric Holder submitted to Congress by Attorney General Eric Holder, suggested that under “extraordinary” circumstances, such as Pearl Harbor or 9/11, the president could kill an American citizen on American soil. In testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, Holder specifically admitted that killing an American in the United States would be inappropriate and unconstitutional if the individual did not pose an imminent threat.
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/03/06/1683851/rand-paul-launches-talking-filibuster-demands-assurance-obama-wont-use-drones-against-americans-in-us/#comment_link
Tell me how is the feigned scary drone meme Paul purports any different than Blacks being killed en masses, Timothy McVeigh, the people killed in the civil rights movement, or Waco?
Yes it's people like you, who want this country back; back to the days when Black people were invisible in the eyes of society; and the days of slavery when Blacks were not permitted to form more than 2or 3 in a group ; not to mention suppression of the rights of voters, women, Hispanics, LGBTs, and Native Americans.
Talk to the Hand
Yeah, found this out in 2010 when I joined. I just like swimming with the sharks. These peeps need their daily ego strokes from one another but they need a little balance in their life.
Then don't. The typical liberal response to the fact that you have no original ideas of your own... you copy and paste from liberal sources. I do not find any credibility with a news source that lies to the American public. Apparently you do.
In your quest for defending yourself, you try to make references to items you know I can't verify... how credible. Since I gloss over your liberal rants... I'm simply not interested in reading the same drivel over and over again on how all conservatives are wrong and republicans need to be eliminated. Your one party rule is so Soviet oriented everything you write is dismissed. Put me on ignore. That's the cowards way out. Take it.
See? This is exactly my point. Suggesting that I be murdered... Don't ever try to defend yourself again... This extreme rationale tells all tales. The nerve of you liberals to call the right extreme... Hypocracy at it's finest!
This is a forum of OPINION... Liberals spin theirs all the time... It takes someone from the right to call them on it. You spin so much, you are drunk from it.
Posters like Morgs and edgarw will miss the excellent points in David Walkers post. Complexity confuses the right thus they stick to talking points issued by organizations such as FOX "News" and others who frequently chew up the truth and and regurgitate to feed a few million of their followers.
Anyone who sees this above or any of Maddow, Matthews, and Sharptons as anything more than entertainment is on the extreme side of their party and lost. I know lefties have more of a conscience than what is displayed here, I know many of them. It is too bad this site pigeon holes all of you but you have no one but yourselves to blame. Your daily affirmations of each other is heartwarming but it really does you no good if you want to be a moderate.
No, no, no Morgs74, go for it. By all means keep calling me out. Of course, most readers can get to the truth when it's put in front of their faces. We'll start here.
Here's the link to Morgs74's lie yesterday. http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/06/17211596-house-votes-to-avert-shutdown-fund-us-through-sept?commentId=74652357#c74652357
The question was asked why some Democrats voted against a CR. I answered that it was because they believed that was the only way they'd get defense cuts. Pretend lawyer Morgs74 says because I made this statement, I must approve of the sequester.
I challenged him to show where I said I approved of the sequester. Of course, he couldn't. To further demonstrate his ignorance, he went after Rep. Charles Rangel who had the unmitigated gall to sponsor a bill that would continue Selective Service registration. Hair on fire, he had to take this horrible information to his kids. Of course, this law has been on the books for many, many years. Kinda makes you wonder whether pretend lawyer ever served in the military, or whether he even registered with the Selective Service. Pretend patriot, too?
Holy smokes. At 1.65, pretend lawyer Morgs calls me out again, when he writes:
Pretend lawyer doesn't seem to grasp the fact that the detainees at Gitmo are "suspected terrorists". Suspected is the operative word there. Of course, I didn't make any mention of defending a suspected terrorist either, but why would we let a fact get in the way of pretend patriot Morgs.
Truly, there's only one thing in your posts that bothered me. You have kids. How very sad.
Yesterday, this was an email from Obama to Brown. Today, it is an email from Brown to his staff. What will it be tomorrow? Brown-gate sounds oddly familiar - like that Friends of Hamas-gate, or Benghazi-gate, or Fast&Furious-gate, Menendez-Dominican Republic Prostitute-gate.
If you are going to gossip - at least make it interesting, like McCain/Graham NoTell Motel-gate.
Silver Flyer - Looks like you can thank Obama too for trying to make this as hard on everybody as he can, just like the Brown email said. A little more on the topic that you may have missed. It doesn't mean the airports are being shut down you'll see.
Spenser Dickerson, head of the Contract Tower Association said "We're extremely discouraged and disappointed that the FAA is taking this action," Dickerson said. "The rest of the FAA's budget is getting a 5 percent haircut; the contract towers are getting a 75 percent cut, because the FAA is cutting 189 of the 251 contract towers."
"It's hard for us to see the fairness in the budget cuts. It seems the contract tower program is taking a high, disproportionate cut. We have serious concerns about the safety, efficiency and loss of jobs in almost 150 communities across the country," he said.
The FAA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The towers are part of the FAA's contract tower program, in which 251 towers are staffed with contractors instead of FAA employees. Though little-known, contract towers are widely used by the FAA to manage air traffic. Such towers handle approximately 28 percent of all control tower operations, although the towers being cut account for a little less than 6 percent of commercial airline operations.
Tower closures would not necessarily result in airport closures, because some aircraft can land without air traffic control help, and those that need controller help can communicate with more distant FAA facilities. But the contract tower closings will contribute to the workload at other FAA facilities, which simultaneously will be coping with controller furloughs.
edgarw
David does anything BUT copy and paste but I appreciate your effort to belittle his points (I always appreciate a good laugh)
Morgs74,
Outrage? Nope, no outrage. Ridicule. Everyone got it but you.
If you know how to spell "egregious", why is it that you don't know "eyebrow" in one word? Never mind. Don't answer.
I have criticized the President for many things. So has David Walker. As has Jody Iowa. And newday. And dcia. And other liberals who post here. As TomasGrande pointed out in #1.69.
Hilary Pres and the House Dem majority by 2016. Texas and AZ purple thereafter.. BANK ON IT!!
Something tells me you made the same type of comment in 2008... look how well 2010 went.
Beverly in Chicago
Clearly, you believe that Rand Paul was wrong. In that case, why do you support droning American citizens to death on American soil without due process? Because if you believe that Rand Paul's filibuster yesterday was wrong, that is what you are supporting. I sincerely hope you do not believe that it is consititutional or ethical to drone American citizens to death on American soil without due process. I think secretly you don't believe it is constitutional or ethical, you just can't bring yourself to support someone from the "other team" making an important and crucial point. Not only is that petty, but it leads you to launching weak ad hominems. Such is the life of a partisan Democrat or partisan Republican.
Jack,
I for one would like to see an example of that Jack. To my recollection the only time any of you have called out the President were those few and far between times when he may indicate he is going to "cave" as you all put it.
Your history is on your "column" so, if you can, find and example and I will cook my own crow.
(Waiting now for the "I don't have to prove sh!t to you or anyone else of your ilk" comment in 3....2....1)
David Walker - Please, pretend lawyer? You give me way to much credit, I am only a pretend engineer with a pretend job. For being a failed writer you sure come up with some doozeys.
Go on, more about me please. And people think Fisty has a fan following.
And yet again you rather defend them than one of your own fellow Americans. How very American of you. How many tears did you shed for dear Hugo? I am guessing yesterday was a day of mourning for you.
edgarw
Bravo!
Glad you FINALLY admit what Faux sNewzzzzz has been doing to the American public for the last 20 years.
Salud
This is so funny it needs to be repeated. It's edgarw quoting David's post, and then edgarw replying to David. Ahhh, edgarw, you no doubt take every word in the Bible literally. [BTW: is a "Hypocracy" a crazed hippo?]
See? This is exactly my point. Suggesting that I be murdered... Don't ever try to defend yourself again... This extreme rationale tells all tales. The nerve of you liberals to call the right extreme... Hypocracy at it's finest!
And BTW Morgs and edgar, you know you are on the right track and striking a nerve when they start ganging up on you. If it weren't so sad that they can't see it, it would be funny.
Morgs74
Once again.
You are repeating a FALSE equivalency that O;Reilly, Rush, Hannity have all shoved down your throat.
My guess is you also hate Media Matters, which posts videos of your side SAYING the BS they try and make the half the American public believe.
You simply don't get it.
Faux, Rush and the conservative media IS PROPAGANDA.
Period.
Salud
Tomas, the fact that you think anthing on MSNBC after 6pm is fact based and 100% true is... well sad. It speaks volumes about you and those who watch said programs. The same goes for Fox.
edgarw:
Don't put words in my mouth. You wrote:
I never said any such thing. I made no such suggestion. I wrote:
Dammit boy, can't you get anything straight? There was no suggestion that you be murdered. However, I will amend my previous statement to include, I'd probably have a party if you were murdered. Do you honestly think you're such a special guy that I would feel bad if someone offed you?
Talk,
If you really believe I'm going to waste time searching through my posts to prove to you that I have called out the President, you're stupider than I thought you were.
Talk to the Hand
Kudos to exposing yourself to everyone as a paid RW Troll.
Salud
The liberals are closed minded. They are stuck in their obsession with progressive ideas which are anything but progressive. In fact all progressive thought is regressive in nature; controlling and tyrannical.
Liberals feel they are superior to everyone else. Some are college educated... but where were they taught? In liberal institutions so therefore they adopt liberal principles. The liberals on this board exhibit all the typical characteristics of their ideology... this is why I find it so entertaining... In order to find out what they think and how they operate, what better place to come. It doesn't matter how much you argue with them, they shut out all reasonable thought. I haven't encountered many liberals that would even let a conservative thought enter their brains... in this I applaud them... they can walk through life blinded. I on the other hand am free, because the ability to discern what is right and what is wrong is not covered over by the liberal ideology.
TomasGrande - If you don't see the similarities between Sharpton/O'riely, Maddow/Hannity, Matthews/Beck you are to far entrenched and will probably stay that way for life. These people are all propagandists.
Instead of listening to Shemp, try C-Span, get the facts straight from the horses mouth. Visit a government site. If you can't find any of the facts I spout out on your websites you need to rethink what you are being told and by whom.
Bev in Chcago - YOU are voting for the destruction of the Blacks in Chicago, I bet your proud. Who speaks for them?
David Walker after your last comment its sad that not ounly are you an ungreatful American... you are a human being.
It's sad how hateful the left really is.
This sounds like someone who is jealous of those who went on to institutions of higher learning.
It's also sophomoric (if I can use that term and not be ironic) because it assumes that everyone who graduates from such institutions becomes a liberal.
edgarw--your ignorance and small-minded rantings are astonishing.
Chip D-2844144
Never said it was fact based 100%
It's all corporate owned media.
Salud
Hey Morgs, laugh behind Davey's back? Noway..I LOL IN HIS FACE..
Where's my leg humping Pawn....
Morgs writes --
Are you suggesting all schools be Republican operated and adopt faux science and whatever else they want to dictate? Liberty U for all????? Bet that's what you'd like. Sheesh! You probably DO NOT see the irony of your statements. This gal is glad to have the freedom to go wherever I please.
BTW -- When it comes to fiscal matters Morgs I'm certain I'm more conservative than you.
David Walker - I can't wait until I am able to do a background check on your mental status as a private party. I have to see where all the hate is coming from because it isn't normal. I was thinking Paxil or Zoloft but after the last rant I upped you to lithium or some other anti-psychotic.
I think I know why you are so anti-gun, if you can't own them no one should be able to. Green eyed monster is strong in you.
"It's all corporate owned media.
Including media matters...
Anthony California
Beverly in Chicago
Clearly, you believe that Rand Paul was wrong. In that case, why do you support droning American citizens to death on American soil without due process? Because if you believe that Rand Paul's filibuster yesterday was wrong, that is what you are supporting. I sincerely hope you do not believe that it is consititutional or ethical to drone American citizens to death on American soil without due process. I think secretly you don't believe it is constitutional or ethical, you just can't bring yourself to support someone from the "other team" making an important and crucial point. Not only is that petty, but it leads you to launching weak ad hominems. Such is the life of a partisan Democrat or partisan Republic
Anthony California,
Yes, I clearly do because Rand Paul's rant had jack to do with Brennan's nomination. Regarding drones; don't talk to me about due process. How many Black men our sitting in jail because there was no due process. I'm curious to see if Zimmerman walks.
I'm not being partisan; I just trust my President and Att General Holder. Holder did say it would be unconstitutional. All I see is parse of words coming from trolls.
Anyone else notice the pattern of their "persecution complex" forming here... lol
And what gives you the idea I watch Fox News? Are you an invisible creature in my living room at night while I spend my TV time watching pay channels? I know... you think the pay channels are Fox news... that has to be it. Some people are just plain confused. They think all conservative ideas HAVE to come from Fox News... maybe it's conservative thought that haunts you... somewhere down in the bowels of your soul you have a conflict ideologically... hmmmm?
Similarities??? LMFAO!
Rachel Maddow holds a doctorate degrees while Hannity is a college drop out!
All the libs that believe the sky is falling with the sequester and the fat cat's in Washington can't figure out a way to cut a couple points off the bloated budget need to read the following and let it sink in for a few minutes....
Dont_carry_it_all - Get your posters correct you dolt.
If you were one bit a fiscal conservative you hide it well.
From one of your previous posts...
Well I didn't have to dig too deep to find a nice contradiction.
edgarw, it's common theme amongst the illogical... if you aren't a left winger you MUST be watching Fox news.
Bev, if I were you, I wouldn't be worrying so much about all the black men in jails (thanks to liberal drug laws), i'd be more worried abut the 500 black's in YOUR OWN CITY that kill each other EVERY year.
Perish the thought!
Creepy . . . .
Feisty,
You betcha!
Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL
I meant their hair cut and penises.
All of these fools are just that, fools.
you do that, and he'll definitely become a killer using a 'Bushmaster AR-15' with a 75 Rnd 'clip'.
Culus Onan ... your "leg humping Pawn" is none other than yourself.
Another point of mine proven. You spin so much you are drunk. You can try to back peddle out of your words all you want but they are there for all to see. "You wouldn't complain" means that a desire exists. Since you made the comparison to conservatives and tea party and how using a drone on them would upset you... you wouldn't complain if it were used on me. This response of yours falls out of the category of spin and lands right in the BS bucket.
"Rachel Maddow holds a doctorate degrees"
And so does Bush... your ignorant point is?
edgarw . . . .
I've been reading the back and forth exchange all morning and your post at 1.92 really pissed me off . .
Pretty sure you plagiarized that one. For the record little man re-reg, you know nothing about liberals other than what you are handed on your FOX-filled plate. Don't speak for the progressive liberals that post here. Speak about your own ilk. Tell us how it feels to wake up every morning with so much angst, paranoia, and hatred in your soul not only for yourself but for everyone in this country that does not think as you do.
Jealous? Only in your mind. You don't know me, my background, my education so therefore using a term such as jealous is a pure deflection of your inability to acquire any of my background. Aren't anonymous boards grand? There's nothing like leaving your opponents of ideology guessing... Its a lot of fun!
edgarw,
Maybe not, but your posts are revealing to the extent that you can be summed up in a single word: Pathetic.
Morgs -- Comes back with PROOF OF MY CONSERVATIVE leanings. You actually believe that the BUSH GANG, Boehner et al., you know, those that RAN UP THE DEBT by using a credit card, are CONSERVATIVES??? LOL
Notice the name calling Morgs engages in? YOU have NOTHING else do ya Morgs?
Is it my belief that unions have a place in the workplace that is bothering you Morgs?
Even Milton Friedman, the Republicans go to economist believes in UNIONS and was against "Right to Work" laws.
Careful on calling someone ignorant Chippy, when you wrote this only a few minutes ago, little buddy!
edgarw
Ideas? Hardly. Its conservative viewpoint.
Fair and Balanced, my ass.
Haunts?
Scares the fricken hell out of me.
Salud
hey big buddy care to define what was wrong with the comment about Davey Poseur? misspellings doesnt make one ignorant...after all FISTY ROTTENCROTCH..you make plenty yourself...DUMFUK
Thomas Grand, keep your idiotic stereotypes and generalities to yourself bigot.
Chaesar Augustus-
"Where's my leg humping Pawn...."?
Hey everybody... It's time to put our political differences aside and come together in a humanitarian effort to help Chaesar Augustus... Someone very near and dear to him has turned up missing and he's totally distraught at the moment. This person obviously means the world to him and no doubt they've been together from the start... So let's all just forget the vitriol for the moment and work together to return to Poor Chaesar what he yearns for the most!
Chip D-2844144
Hey Chip, do you even know what a doctoral degree is?
Now he did get a Master degree from Harvard w a Bachelors from Yale. (and its my assertion he only got admitted to Yale in the first place because of his dear ol dad as he was a "C" student (his words)).
And YOUR ignorant point is??
Caesar Augustus-
As usual, "Pot, meet kettle".
Salud
Wow! Do all liberals have this re-reg complex? Someone earlier accused me of being this Brianb person. He must have been annoying to liberals... I wish I knew him.
Another one that sees all things conservative as Fox oriented... do you have a Fox phobia?
I can speak about any ideology I like. I can point out it's faults, it's imperfections and the things that tear up this country while that particular ideology is the center point of a government program, or anything else I disagree with. If you find it insulting, I can't help you. Defend what you believe, if that makes you feel justified.
As far as me waking up in the morning... my only anger is at a government that has gotten us so deep in national debt and an administration that is doing nothing to stop it. This should make every American angry... but I see liberals ignore it and treat it as something that will not effect us, our children, or grandkids.
Morgs - You write:
MY post 1.99 was addressed to you by mistake. It should have been to edgarw. My apologies. Fixed below.
My post 1.118 to you stands however.
edgarw writes --
Are you suggesting all schools be Republican operated and adopt faux science and whatever else they want to dictate? Liberty U for all????? Bet that's what you'd like. Sheesh! You probably DO NOT see the irony of your statements. This gal is glad to have the freedom to go wherever I please.
BTW -- When it comes to fiscal matters edgarw I'm certain I'm more conservative than you.
To those of you who claimed the President never reached across the aisle, here's your plate of crow.
Bon Appetit!
Jack says:
After I said:
I rest my case.
edgar w . . .
You are a re-reg and you know it. Funny that you seem compelled to come to an MSNBC site, after being banned, just to complain about the posters who have followed the rules and haven't. It's one of those funny things - trust - playing by the rules - that makes a poster worthy of a read. For you to continue to spout all of your first-hand knowledge about liberals without being one, is comical to say the least.
poor Thomas didnt see the irony. here i'll spell it..didnt you call me a bigot (typical lib with no proof) and agreed with Davey boy about my being stereo typical..and what were you doing? Are you tracking now?
Is the pot blacker than the kettle?
Layton, give it a rest, you dont mind your lefty tool bags that re-reg constantly to defacate in here so whats good for the goose they say...
Like i said, its a good thing you liberals arent hypocrites
Caesar . . . .
Find one. Just one. For once, back up your BS with a fact.
Layton - Would be interested to know how you and Feisty are the privileged ones who know who reregs and who doesn't.
Time for you to prove it. Or is that an insider DDI liberal secret? (wink, wink)
To quote:
You're delusional. I found First Read in December and signed up. It was an MSN article and I was amazed at how many liberals there were all clustered in one place. I thought to myself... this might be fun. I've known liberals most of my adult life... I know what they think and how they operate. Are you under the impression that liberals ONLY gather here? Grow up!
Layton -
I ask you to do the same...
Talk - probably shouldn't laugh your ass off quite yet. Stupider is indeed a word. Now who's laughing????
Morgs74 . . .
Where would you like me to start?
http://uncle-milty.newsvine.com/_news/2013/03/01/17151380-201303-march-2013-bansuspension-list
That's just March. You can link back to the banned list and see quite a few of the little darlings that continually come back under new names. I think my personal favorite was BigBenAlaska, who became ONTOR, who became??? They aren't hard to spot if you pay attention to posting styles.
You can almost hear the anger in their voices (Chuck Todd & gang) as you read this column.
They have become so liberal that you can anticipate the response on happenings in Washington. They never have any kind words for anyone that doesn't support the actions of Barack Obama and most of the Democratic party.
It's a sad day in America when the news media takes sides with an administration that has and continues do harm to our country and its people.
One can only imagine what the next 4 years will bring with the current administration's failed policies and the agenda of the liberal media.
Layton-3733410 - This is just a list of names. Meaning less. I want you to show me where my name and my IP have been linked to another name. The only way you will be able to get this info is from a site admin or if you have admin privileges. IP's or STFU.
What is funny is a good number of them are libs. Banned for "Death to Republicans"
youre kidding right....is your head in the sand or up your own azz or FISTY's....RUKEN,XABRE,CHICK BINDER.
http://uncle-milty.newsvine.com/_news/2013/03/01/17151380-201303-march-2013-bansuspension-list
Yeah Lameton, you might want to indeed browse through there instead of assuming that everyone banned and banned for Reregging is a conservative....
For once could you please stop inserting your head up your fellow libs asses... oh and i wonder if you are the only lib in Layton Ut.
It may be a word but it sounds stupider than saying "more stupid". LOL Thanks SS. I guess I was raised when it was more correct to say more stupid and if you said stupider, you just pointed as yourself.
I stand corrected (but it still doesn't sound right)
As for haggis............nah. : )
I think you struck a nerve.
Not sure why they get so touchy on the subject but they do (obviously)
sreeeeminglib - I just happen to be in the biz, I know how this works and I know what is needed to have irrefutable proof. IP's, MAC's and the such. If you don't have them you are only blowing smoke.
Good job Rand Paul!
I hope people remember your position when they are getting drone strikes all around their house and coffee shops...
I won't blame you and say you didn't try!
Caesar and Morgs74 - you two need to pick better battles. This one I could give a rats ass about being right on but you two certainly lost it!
You're a hacker Morgs?
Good hell Caesar, talk about a reach! You'd insult your own mother for smiling if she refuted you! Just laughing!!!
It is much easier to hear when you don't have your fingers in your ears and are yelling bla,bla, bla, bla, bla at the top of your lungs.
WOW! Most of the liberals on this board must be the same person then... they have one posting style... ignorant.
I take that back... there has to be more than one liberal posting on this board... I don't think one person could contain that much partisan hatred for all conservatives... it has to be a shared attribute.
Morgs74 - actually there are other ways to see when a poster is a rereg and if you were actually in the business, you'd know that!
In other words, "I have no clue other than you two sound like someone who used to post so you must be a rereg"
I would love to know that little secret. Is that a real estate secret or just the DDI? : )
you asked for an example Lameton, I provided..typical deflect and project....
hows Utah treating you? i can see why you come here being an outcast in a 'whacko' state like that..
SeekingSanity - Tell me how because I would love to use these new forensic techniques in my practice. Please enlighten me. Tell me how you can identify a computer on a network without a IP address, MAC Address or the same.
I won't hold my breath.
It amazes me how many of you are commenting on here, calling Rand Paul worthless and whatever other negative things you can think of. I'm assuming none of you actually listened to a single thing Senator Paul said or have read any other article detailing what his filibuster was about other than this one.
Firstly, John Brennan was the first person in the Obama administration to publicly acknowledge several CIA drone attacks.
Secondly, Senator Paul had asked multiple times to get an answer over whether the President, the Attorney General and John Brennan believe whether or not it is Constitutional to conduct target drone attacks against US Citizens on US soil. The response Senator Paul received from John Brennan was that the (ok, I'm paraphrasing, but you can research this if you really don't believe me) CIA has no authority to conduct and does not conduct Drone strikes inside the US. While Rand Paul believes that that is a sufficient response from Mr. Brennan, he still believed that that response was vaguer than it should have been as it only details the CIA's approach. Yes, John Brennan is nominated to be the CIA Director and therefore wouldn't have the authority to conduct drone strikes inside the US, however, John Brennan is one of the main members of the administration's drone program and therefore ties into Senator Paul's desire to receive answers from the President and/or the Attorney General.
The Attorney General sent Senator Paul a response on March 4th, that said that the administration (again, paraphrasing) has not and does not intend to conduct Drone strikes against US citizens on US Soil, however, he did not rule out the possibility in case of "extraordinary circumstances". The Attorney General then said that the administration can and will use lethal force against such extraordinary circumstances, such as what occured on 9/11 or on December 7th at Pearl Harbor.
Senator Paul's views on this is that on both of those "extraordinary circumstances", 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, Drone Strikes would not really be used and that the idea of "Targeted Drone Strikes" is more about using drones to take out targets who are 'allegedly' working with terrorists and are deemed to be an "imminent threat". However, the only model for drone strikes that is currently available is the foreign drone strikes that we have currently, which means that "imminent" does not mean immediate. Meaning, if you are planning to launch a terrorist attack against the US, but don't actually plan to attack for 2 months, you are still deemed an "imminent threat" even though it isn't happening for 2 months.
What that would mean, is that if this administration or any administration after it deems you an "imminent threat", then under their current assessment that these drone strikes are constitutional, then they can launch send a drone after you without due process of law. Due process of law is required by the constitution and is a right for all American citizens. So what Senator Paul wants President Obama and/or the Attorney General to admit is that they are willing to uphold the Constitution and that unless if there is an immediate, imminent threat then drone strikes would not be used against US citizens on US soil, as there would be way for that citizen to defend his/her actions.
So what I am trying to say, is that in no way was Senator Rand Paul trying to "stick it to the 'Black man'", but that he was standing for his belief and many American's belief that the Constitution is something that needs to be cherished and upheld and not just used whenever it was useful, only to be tossed aside whenever it hindered one's agenda. As he said many times during his long filibuster, this isn't necessarily about what President Obama intends to do, or what President Obama might do, it is fundamentally about protecting every American Citizen's right from every potential President or future government that might want to infringe on their rights.
Morgs74
See all Layton said was They aren't hard to spot if you pay attention to posting styles
Now I direct your attention to Feisty at Inside The Boiler Room (2.10, 2.13) where she calls out GOP Comeback 2014 as the former Bob 18805 aka Bob in Virginia all based on his style of ranting.
See ol Vagina Bob fesses up to it
No IPs needed. Easy peasy....
Well put Stack, I am stealing it.
sreeeeminglib -
You would make a fine detective...conviction at every trial with evidence like this. Leave it to the pro's, Tyler and Sally. Seems they are on top of things.
Easy Peasy...I have heard that before. Matter fact I have said that. Are you me? Better luck next topic.
Seeking...I am still waiting.
@Layton - I'm not sure a rock qualifies as a mother. Hatched, born, lives .. rocks. It all applies!!
"Oh, want more evidence the damage the sequester debate had on Obama? He has just a 45%-46% approval rating in the latest Quinnipiac poll."
Which is the REAL reason for the dinner - Obama wanted a 'photo-op'.
By the way - For those claiming that Obama has proposed a 'plan' for spending cuts, 'talking' about being willing to 'put entitlements on the table' is NOT a 'plan' - it's a 'speech', and as the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has pointed out previously, "We can't score a speech". meaning that unless sufficient details are given so that Budget projections can be made, it's nothing but talk.
The next time Obama says that he's offering a 'plan to cut spending', the Republicans should say "Give the details to the CBO so they can 'score' it for its effect on the Budget". Without that, it's just more 'hot air'.
One last point with regards to spending 'cuts' - Any proposed spending cut that extends beyond the current term for Obama is meaningless, because NO current President or Congress can obligate a future President or Congress to any specific spending limits - All future Presidents and Congresses get to set their OWN Budgets after they take office. So if Obama claims that he's cutting spending by $2 Trillion, and all of it is supposed to happen AFTER he leaves office in 2016, it's not worth the paper its written on.
Caesar . . .
Pretty damn well actually and you wouldn't ask if you'd ever been here. Where do you hang your hat? Should we all start insulting States now? Man but you are a low reaching thing!
Did you miss the part where Vagina Bob fesses up to being a rereg? see Boiler Room 2.13 again
I do. Feisty Layton and Seeking to name a few
kkwilson "It's a sad day in America when the news media takes sides with an administration that has and continues do harm to our country and its people....One can only imagine what the next 4 years will bring with the current administration's failed policies and the agenda of the liberal media."
One thing that is almost certain is INFLATION.
In EVERY instance throughout the World (including the USA in the 1970s) where the government has increased the money supply significantly faster than the economy has grown, it has led to high inflation (or hyperinflation in Germany, Brazil and Zimbabwe).
In the last few years, we have seen a DRAMATIC increase in the money supply (M1) by the Federal Reserve to fund the huge $Trillion Deficits (especially since China is no longer buying our Debt and has been quietly cashing in over $200 Billion of their loans to us).
There is normally a 'lag time' of a few short years before the inflation hits, and we will soon be seeing that happen. The politicians will, of course, blame anyone and everyone else, but the truth is actually quite simple. Even the far-left Liberal outlet The Huffington Post recognized this;
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sheldon-filger/federal-reserve-begins-ma_b_677483.html
Edgar, first you say this:
And then you say this:
And you can call others hypocrites.
Amazing!
insulting states...when did i do that? I hang my hat where ever i may Roam...Ask Monkey Ny where i live...she knows, thats why she'll fly under the radar here come september...So Lameton, did you not like my example since it didnt fit your narrative?? Yeah i thought so...so as Screeming moron said, leave the lying to the Pros. Seeking Approval, Lameton, Fisted Rottencrotch.. ;o)
I love that David Poseur also called me mixed bag...thats an honor...I liked watching him beat down you libs daily....tiny hard to miss detail is that ive been here since 09, mixed was posting simulateneously .....next up...multireg accusations...PROVE IT BIOTCH
But lets just see how many multi accounts that Fisty has...lets dig into how many little rabbit holes the libs have created to 'strategize' against the conservative posters...further it by planning clandestine meetings with hack journalists and flagging to get people banned... Yeah I'd say Poseur and Lameton et al, the varmits come from the Occutard left...
Unfortunately it's probably David Poseur or Fisty that is next up on the Belltower with their Rem 700
Hey Ruken (chick binder), thanks for the shout out!
Was that your way of trying to explain how 1+2=5? Placing two independent thoughts together to create a conclusion seems not to work in this instance. In the first comment, there was no mention of any identity... in the second comment the nonidentity described was potentially mine. How in the hell do you attach the two thoughts together in order to formulate a hypocracy theorem? Logic escapes yet another liberal mind.
Whatever you say, Edgar. That you would need to offer so much rhetoric in support of such a simple statement speaks volumes.
Blown out agin. Hate it.
This news just in. It appears hell has frozen over. Not only do I agree with Roy Wilson, who said:
I think he has understated the issue. Inflation is a certainty unless we take dramatic action. No one really knows how much money the Fed has printed. No one. However, to have averted the world-wide disaster that was in the offing, thanks to a financial services sector that was and still is beyond corrupt, the amount has to be many trillions of dollars.
The bulk of that money has been removed from the economy and placed in accounts of the very, very rich. What remains in circulation and on the books is devalued beyond imagination. The only way to stop inflation, super-inflation, or even hyper-inflation is to claw back the money that has gone to the financial services sector.
Here's an example of what has happened. Homes changed hands like crazy. Prices went up, but not values. Along the way, every Tom, Dick, and Harry took money off the top, but no one had it down like the bankers. That's where derivatives came into the picture. Ask any homeowner you know how many times their loans were sold. You'll find that many of them had their loans sold several times and each time bankers took a cut. Home prices collapsed, but the bankers and their crooked buddies kept the difference. That is inflation waiting to happen.
We really must take it back. In exchange, because I'm a swell guy, I'm willing to pay room and board for the bankers for the rest of their miserable lives at the Leaventworth Graybar Hotel.
Caesar Augustus-
"youre kidding right....is your head in the sand or up your own azz or FISTY's....RUKEN,XABRE,CHICK BINDER."
For the last time you pompous little multi-colored sock-monkey...
I am an original... Not Ruken or whatever new ex-poster your jealous little mind conjures up on the regular... You should probably face the fact that many more than one person has no trouble taking your milk money and eating your lunch... In fact, it's amazing you haven't grown used to it by spending your entire existence as low-hanging fruit like you do.... Why just today you sent out a melancholy call for "your little leg-humper"... It's like T-Ball with you...
Feel free to make inquiries as to how mistaken you are... That's what all your routine posts amount to anyway.
David Walker "This news just in. It appears hell has frozen over. Not only do I agree with Roy Wilson, who said:"One thing that is almost certain is INFLATION.", I think he has understated the issue. Inflation is a certainty unless we take dramatic action. No one really knows how much money the Fed has printed. No one."
Actually, we do have fairly recent information on M1 - basic money supply. It has increased from about $1.4 Trillion a few years ago to about $2.5 Trillion now. Monetary theory (proven invariably in the past) states that if we have an 80% increase in the money supply, it will soon lead to an 80% increase in prices.
Unfortunately, it takes a few years before Inflation begins, but it also takes several years to correct once it gets started - leading to 'stagflation' (both a stagnant economy, higher unemployment AND higher prices).
Obama's 'Legacy' will not be pretty.
Love or hate Senator Rand Paul, at least he stepped up and gave a PROPER filibuster.
Senator Paul is touching on an issue that really doesn't have a D or R stance. The extremists will call him a loon. The Libertarians will call him a saint. In the end the reasonable middle sees him bringing up a valid issue about Constitutional rights that bears further discussion.
"How long are you going to speak, Senator Paul?"
"Depends".
Does this mean we can finally have an adult conversation about the Gitmo detainees?
Yeah, but only for 13 hours and he probably never even read the phone book. This morning on the Early Show he was whining about how his feet hurt among other things. They just don't make republicans like they used too.
Witty, Ms. Fascist...I like.
Due respect...you stand for 13 hours straight and see how you do.
Da Noid
I agree. He spoke at length on a serious issue about the use of drones domestically. That is the sort of thing that SHOULD slow down Senate proceedings. This is a lot different than the silent filibusters of Obama appointments done out of spite.
TexasT-2966501
TexasT ,
Oh yea?
The rules of engagement for the use of deadly force in this context: Emergency Power and the Militia Acts
IF ONLY RAND PAUL:
HAD BEEN STUMPING ABOUT THE NEED FOR GOP TO BE ON THE SIDE OF JOB CREATION.
The Tea Party ran on that in 2010.
Since then GOP has filibustered every Jobs Bill.
He kept on topic pretty well nearly the whole time.
I've been there. My former job saw me doing 14 - 26 hour shifts on occasion, all of it on my feet. After doing that all you want to do is curl up in a ball and soak in a bath for a few hours.
I don't agree with Rand Paul on many things. But I can both agree with him and have respect for his actions on this issue.
Agreed, Houston. The silent filibusters through the years have done nothing but contribute to the intestinal blockage in DC.
Da noid, I have no respect for Rand Paul, he is part of the problem, not the cure.
You said "Due respect...you stand for 13 hours straight and see how you do."
I guess you don't remember real filibusters, ones where Senators slept in the hallways on cots, where people read the L.A. phone book to take up time. Among other things that went on. Real filibusters. Paul is a wuss for only speaking for 13 hours. It was token.
Obama dining with the repubs; it's called a skip-level interview - when an employee talks to his boss's boss directly instead of having information/complaints sanitized by his boss before it gets to the boss's boss.
Do you not think a little planned media competition with the Prez/Senator dinner was in there?
I think that's ALL that was in there... What's any good self-flagellating racist narcissist to do when he doesn't get an invite... Make up a fake question and filibuster the lack of answer during the whole party the "cool kids" got invited to... Then stroll out victorious with your ass tilted on your head at a jaunty angle. He's a cartoon.
he gets some respect for his little show imo, but not much since he was doing it just to block another one of obamas picks. Just wondering where was this 13 hour speech when it was really needed, you know before the NDAA was passed by some of the very people who are trying to attach themselves to this current position.
The NDAA is a gross attack on our rights, possibly even more so than the bush and obama patriot act since those did not go as far as legalizing the murder of an american citizen without due processes.
For those on the left that are ignoring this because you trust obama not to abuse this power or you are just too far up anyone with D after their name's butt, how do you feel about a future right wing president with this power? How about Jeb bush or any other R from texas? Would you trust them with the ability to declare you a terrorist with no concrete evidence other than some rumors or a grudge, then classify all so called evidence to the highest levels so no one will ever know they were not justified in bombing you and your family (since they were cohorts of a suspected terrorist). Yes most of us sane people believe this senario is unlikely, but why open yourself or your descendants to this possibility?
For those on the right, if you do not stand up for others rights (the reason you claim to need your guns) to free speech, due process, the right to vote uninhibited by petty laws, or the rights to live your life how you see fit (as long as it doesn't erode the rights of others, than do not be surprised when we do not stand for your right to own those guns.
Beverly in Chicago,
Despite what you copied and pasted into your post, my liberal self has to side with Rand Paul (which is a very odd feeling). Per Brennan's own written response to Paul, Brennan considers the use of drones to assassinate a US citizen on US soil (without due process) to be a "gray area". Yes, Brennan quickly goes on to state that the Obama administration would never abuse that gray area. However Brennan, who will basically be in charge of the US drone program as head of the CIA, admits that this moral quandry is basically a big loophole.
A loophole? What the heck!? That's my issue with the drone matter. Let's say Obama doesn't abuse this moral gray area. Will the next President in 2016 be as restrained? Or how about the President in 2024? We're currently in the middle of a nexus point in our history. Like it or not, any drone philosophies that we establish right now will likely influence drone policy for the next couple of decades. With this in mind, it's a subject that we should take very seriously and I'm happy that anyone is willing to champion this cause.
Also I have to respect Paul's old school filibuster. While I have a low opinion of him as a politician, he played by the rules and actually forced a conversation through a true filibuster. If every obstructionist GOP member in Congress actually had the guts to do that, we'd have a lot less filibusters and the ones that did occur could actually be productive.
@David Walker#1.4: You are correct Sir. The fitness of an outhouse is not best determined by the measurement of available cobs in the bucket inside, or the quality of the burlap door curtain; it is rather, the smell one encounters when approaching the particular facility. Think "Roy Wilson" along with the other lime deficient turds you named. Regards
Thank you Rand Paul for your "performance".
Personally, I think Rand should have stuck to practicing medicine (Ophthalmology), and instead of avoiding Board re-certification by starting his own Board like real professionals do, man-up and do it the right way. (http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=737974 , etc.)
On the other hand, Angus King (ME-I) was right - you want a filibuster, do it right and show up, and talk on your convictions (or phone book) instead of being wimp and threatening one by phone or e-mail.
I would respect Paul more if he had as much concern about the selling of guns without background checks; registration; training. But, he's only worried about the government doing something they would only do in EXTREME circumstances.
The gun buyers - another story altogether but that doesn't bother him at all. Really makes no sense and totally "shoots" his arguments in the foot!
Right now the Georgia Legislature is considering a measure which will, if passed, ease the existing rules by which the mentally ill can purchase and carry firearms. According to a State Senator speaking on an Atlanta TV newscast last night, It likely will have enough votes to pass. Course, since this is Georgia, these legislators may simply wish to make sure that more than a few hundred people of that State can own and carry guns.
Right now the Georgia Legislature is considering a measure which will, if passed, ease the existing rules by which the mentally ill can purchase and carry firearms. According to a State Senator speaking on an Atlanta TV newscast last night, It likely will have enough votes to pass. Course, since this is Georgia, these legislators may simply wish to make sure that more than a few hundred people of that State can own and carry guns.
Considering a drone doesn't just kill one person this right here makes it not legal.
Also if you would've read the entire thing you would've noticed it said Congress can enact it, not the President himself.
Furthermore, neither one can use our "standing military"
Basically it boils down to it being unconstitutional to drone Americans on American soil.
But thanks for pointing me in the direction of the PDF link it's a very interesting read.
Wiser With Age-
Exactly! Very well stated.
ATF revitalization plans face opposition
By Sari Horwitz and Peter Finn
The Obama administration’s plans to energize the embattled agency that regulates the firearms industry and investigates gun violence are already running into trouble on Capitol Hill, foreshadowing the difficulties facing the president as he moves to advance his gun-control agenda.
President Obama announced his choice of B. Todd Jones to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives last month as a key element in his sweeping slate of gun proposals after the elementary school massacre in Newtown, Conn. Obama urged Congress to quickly confirm Jones in an effort to embolden an agency that has long operated with limited resources and a part-time director who splits his time between Minneapolis and Washington.
Despite the growth of the gun industry and the U.S. population, the ATF has fewer than 2,500 agents, below what it had more than four decades ago. . The agency has a budget of about $1.1 billion. But ATF officials say the agency has the capacity to inspect only a fraction of the nation’s 60,000 retail gun dealers each year, with as many as eight years passing between store visits.
The lack of leadership has sapped morale at the agency, which Jones has attempted to revive since he became the agency’s part-time, acting director in September 2011.
“Todd Jones was dealing with the consequences of a broken agency,” said one ATF official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak for the agency. “We had lost our way. He wanted to get us refocused on our core mission of fighting violent crime.”
It is unclear whether Jones, a federal prosecutor in Minnesota and a former Marine, will get the opportunity. Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), the ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, is demanding Justice Department documents and a formal interview with Jones before any hearing on his nomination.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/atf-revitalization-plans-face-opposition/2013/02/28/8309b74a-7c66-11e2-9a75-dab0201670da_story.html
LaPierre said the government must work to enforce gun laws already on the books, prosecute criminals who misuse firearms, and review the “full range of mental health issues” associated with gun violence.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/lapierre-nra-wont-accept-blame-for-criminals-86868.html
__________________________________________________________
Quite the Conundrum ain’t it
How do you Purportedly support Solutions that you feel will work better to Solve the Problems of Gun Violence all the while making sure that the Solutions don’t get Implemented?
But the Yahoo Brethren have got it down to a Science. You simply give Lip Service to the Solution all the while Defunding the Agency that is in Charge of and has the Best Chance of solving some of the Problem.
And then Piss and Moan about how that Agency is Broken.
You’ll Yahoo’s ought to know.
Hell you been busily engaged in breaking it for about 15 years now.
Independent Redneck Va.
How do you Purportedly support Solutions that you feel will work better to Solve the Problems of Gun Violence all the while making sure that the Solutions don’t get Implemented?
Independent Redneck Va.
Thanks for your article. the answer to your question, I believe, is vote these suckers intent on destruction and delay out of office.
There has not been a head of the ATF for six (6) years thanks to the efforts of the NRA and its 4 million members and its powerful corporate money. The GOP Senators blocked nominees and threatened to block any one nominated by either Presidents Bush or Obama--the very same senators who regularly complain about gun trafficking on our southern border.
The NRA does not want anyone to head the group and lead the organization to enforce the laws on the books. Republican Senators refuse to jeopardize their "A" rating from the NRA; in other words, the GOP is bought and sold by Wayne LaPierre, and the gun and ammunition manufacturers whose goal is to produce more of both and sell them to the public as necessary to their survivial. Worse, the GOP Senators ignore the will of their constitutuents who probably have no idea there is no head of the ATF.
IR, just so.
Well, GOP does it by trying to convince everybody else and their own rank & file --
-that they're not transparently obvious.
This is the absolute hypocrisy of the NRA and their supporters in action. Whenever new guns laws are proposed to curb gun violence in America they say that we should work to enforce the gun laws that are already on the books, and yet, they attempt to block or stall any measure that would help improve enforcement.
I'd at least respect them if there were honest and say they truly believe that the right to own a gun is worth more than the lives of the thousands and thousands of gun victims. Instead, they blame Hollywood and videogames and the mental care system in America, while all the while working to make gun laws even weaker. In Georgia there is a serious effort to allow people to bring guns onto college campuses and churches, which truly frightens me. You can better believe that the NRA is spearheading this movement.
Independent Redneck says:
Despite the growth of the gun industry and the U.S. population, the ATF has fewer than 2,500 agents, below what it had more than four decades ago. . The agency has a budget of about $1.1 billion. But ATF officials say the agency has the capacity to inspect only a fraction of the nation’s 60,000 retail gun dealers each year, with as many as eight years passing between store visits.
So if we do the math there's an average of 21 retail gun dealers for every ATF agent. If we assume the these agent's main task is to inspect the dealers does it not make sense that every dealer could be inspected every year? A 21 dealer workload does not seem that onerous. The ATF employees about 5,000 people. Maybe move more over to inspector roles? Or, even better, privatize this little arm of fed employees. It's a statistical fact that private workers are more productive than public employees - for whatever reason.
Just a thought. Just looking for solutions.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is a federal law enforcement organization within the United States Department of Justice.[3] Its responsibilities include the investigation and prevention of federal offenses involving the unlawful use, manufacture, and possession of firearms and explosives; acts of arson and bombings; and illegal trafficking of alcohol and tobacco products. The ATF also regulates via licensing the sale, possession, and transportation of firearms, ammunition, and explosives in interstate commerce. Many of ATF's activities are carried out in conjunction with task forces made up of state and local law enforcement officers, such as Project Safe Neighborhoods. ATF operates a unique fire research laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland, where full-scale mock-ups of criminal arsons can be reconstructed...............suemac in order for your numbers to work out inspections of gun dealers has to be the ATF's only job. As you can see it's not. Privatise ATF are you joking? I hope you are. Since when is it a good idea to Privatize Law Enforcement. For one thing you are going to double the cost of it. Just look at 'Ol Cheny's attempt to privatize War. We went from paying a private what is essentially minimum wage to paying some Contractor 150,000 dollars a year for doing the same job. Yeh that makes a lot of sense.
The Rand Paul Filibuster of CIA Nominee, John Brennan. Senator Paul began his filibuster Wednesday around noon and ended it in the wee hours of Thursday morning. Mr. Paul deserves credit for filibustering as was intended by the traditional Senate rule--make the case verbally, for or against, standing on the Senate floor instead of by remote-control, cowardly votes which have no consequences for the minority party but have great consequence for the American people and for majority-rule democracy.
No one expects senators who filibuster to speak for hours or days; however, any filibuster should require that those opposed express for all America to hear, for the media to report, exactly why they object. For the past four years, GOP senators have used the filibuster by cowardly vote to block nearly every piece of legislation; they have put nominees on indefinite hold; they have filibustered nominees; they have used the filibuster to delay and to deny and most of America had no idea. Filibuster by silent vote is not Government by Constitution, this is Government by the Tyranny of the Minority.
The criticism of Rand Paul's filibuster is not for his "I will not sit quietly and let Obama shred the Constitution" beginning nor of his desire to shine a light on the Drone program; he earns a cheer for that. It is a criticism of Senator Paul's failure to recognize that the question he asked--whether or not the US would use a Drone to attack a US citizen on US soil--had already been answered.
Perhaps we need a small element of irrational thoughts and questions to focus on the rational ones because it forces legislators and leaders to think about the hypothetical "what if's", and address them prior to the need. Paul deserves credit for his old-fashioned filibuster but he undermined his very own case in the late hours of the filibuster with his rambling thought that Paul doesn't mind, it doesn't bother him, doesn't matter if when you rob a store? (commit a crime) you're shot by a Drone or a police rifle. It seems that Senator Paul droned on a bit too long.
Give Caitlin Halligan an up-or-down vote
CAITLIN J. HALLIGAN has been waiting to become a federal circuit judge ever since President Obama nominated her — in 2010. Since then, she has languished in Senate confirmation hell, repeatedly renominated but refused a simple up-or-down vote. On Wednesday, Democrats tried to break the unjustifiable impasse. Once again, Republicans successfully filibustered, denying a qualified nominee a fair shot at a seat on the bench and leaving the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit short-staffed.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/give-caitlin-halligan-an-up-or-down-vote/2013/03/06/51f81e5e-86b0-11e2-999e-5f8e0410cb9d_story.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
At least Sen. Paul didn’t do this. Part of the problem is that the Yahoo’s are using a legitimate function to slow down Government all the while decrying “Why can’t the Government Work” Kinda hard to make it work when that is your Object in the first place
It struck me that Paul is railing against something that is very unlikely to take an American life, but the fact that thousands of Americans are killed by gun violence every year doesn't drive him to any rational action. I think the average American is threatened more by an automatic weapon or any weapon in the hands of someone who couldn't pass a background check, than they are by a drone. Do people like Rand and his ilk ever recognize the irony?
I objected to the filibuster as it was unrelated to the topic at hand--confirmation of an appointment of the President.
Wonder how Harry Reid feels about filibuster reform now?
The Tea Party-Koch saw fit to $$back Rand in this area.
It is what they haven't dramatized thus far that matter to ordinary people:
Like ONE MILLION JOBS CUT in the Sequester, thanks to GOP leaders.
These guys ever tried running a household on one, or no jobs?
There is a major difference between an American killing another American over some petty dispute vs government executing American citizens without due process. The lone crazy has limited ability to do harm. The government has near limitless ability to do harm.
Always remember that the right to due process is considered a fundamental right granted for being a human being. The right to due process is not some right granted by the government because the government is feeling generous.
Yes, gun violence is an issue that needs addressing. However, the use of armed drones on Americans living in America is a serious issue too. The fact that the executive branch will not come out and say this will never happen is rather shocking and alarming. And I say that as someone who tends to be liberal.
Steeler,
I see some relevance. The CIA is responsible for the use of armed drones by and large right now.
IR, Caitlin Halligan and every other nominee deserves an Up or Down vote. This blocking of democracy must end. There are occasions when a nominee should be subjected to lengthy scrutiny but those cases should be rare as it used to be when democracy worked instead of stagnated in ideological rigidity.
RTFS, true. I don't disagree that Congress should ask the questions and establish legislative laws to prevent the irrational "what if" scenarios but the notion that the United States would send Drones to take out homes and kill US citizens in the United States when there are law enforcement and mililtary personnel readily available to deal with suspected terrorists, etc. is just ridiculous. Senator Paul displays all the paranoia of the John Birch Society only he prefers the Tea Party/Libertarian label.
If it's ridiculous, it shouldn't be hard to say "There is no way under any circumstance that this will occur." The problem is nobody is saying that. And if you corner them to make it clear, they still won't say it.
Pragmatic, I agree in that I have a problem with the use of drones everywhere in the world where innocent human lives are taken. I also have a problem with the death penalty because I prefer punishment that does not include death at the hands of the government which represents me. But I tend to look at governance as a practical endeavor in much the same way as I manage my home life and business. There is a "must do" agenda and a "would like to do" agenda. When I see people like Rand Paul pontificating about the fringes of policy rather than common issues that affect people right now, it scares me that they have so much power and wield it so badly and ineffectually.
To me, it is worth it to spend time on issues such as this. Just not a lot of time. It's a simple issue with a simple solution. Gun violence definitely deserves much more time, thought, and discussion.
Pragmatic, indiscriminate killing of each other because of the sheer volume of guns and the lack of national laws is horribly destructive to American society. Killing is killing; the victims had no due process either. The unrealistic and irrational thinking that the US will use Drones against US citizens in this country is just another version of the far right's paranoia and delusion that a black helicopter is going to land in their front yard. The "lone crazy" did a great deal of harm in Newtown, in Aurora and in towns and cities across the land. The "lone crazy" named Timothy McVeigh did great harm, and those like him waiting for their chance to do the same is a far more likely scenario than a US Drone strike in this country.
@ Backhouse
So, I can only guess that the unemployemnt #'s will go up dramatically tommorrow ( I believe they're posted tommorrow). What 2 or 3 %?
@ Amy
No national laws? Really? How are judges prosecuting criminals in the courts, with no national laws?
I can see you on the fiction best sellers list in no time
The whole argument concerning the administration’s drone policy boils down to the so called militias and government hate groups that are waiting in the wings to go into an armed war with the Federal Government. They think that an armed assault against the Feds would bring the waft Feds down upon their heads in form of armed drones.
Of course we have to remember that many of the so called militia members are not what our Founding Fathers envisioned. Most of them just hate, while many more just cling to their big screen TV's, guns and crazy hate talk.
The bottom line is these juiced up hillbillies would be no match against our Nation’s Federal Agents and Military.
FEBRUARY EMPLOYMENT DATA:
Reuters: Private employers added 198,000 jobs in February, the biggest increase in a year and another sign of improvement in the labor market, a report by a payrolls processor showed on Wednesday.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/06/us-usa-economy-employment-adp-idUSBRE9250N820130306
And yes, 1,000,000 jobs were cut via the indiscrimate sequester cuts - thanks to GOP's refusal to compromise. They ran out the clock, as usual.
Steeler Fan, my thought last night was why didn't Rand Paul filibuster the extension of the Patriot Act to shine a light regarding his "shred the Constitution" concerns, ask questions about the Drone program; why didn't he and other GOPers ask David Petraeus these same questions. In my opinion, Rand Paul wanted public and media attention to set himself up for 2016 as the perpetual libertarian/John Birch/Tea Party presidential candidate. This wasn't about any real concerns, it was about Rand Paul.
There is increasing national coverage of gun violence. The victims had no due process, but it was not expected either. Immaturity resulting in a bullet being the witty comeback has no room for due process in it.
Again, it is worth spending the time on this. Just not a lot, because it is a simple problem with a simple solution. All the executive branch has to say to make this all go away is "We will never use drone strikes on Americans living in America." Cheap, simple words to a simple problem. It's not like we're asking them to admit something totally insane, like faking the moon landings or covering up the existence of aliens. And it would provide some measure of comfort to folks like me who worry we're marching towards a totalitarian police state.
And I do agree that you're much more likely to die by a bullet than you are by a missile. All I'm advocating for is a quick and simple solution to a simple clear-cut issue. Because I know that the longer we spend on issues such as this, the less time is spent discussing issues that do matter, such as gun violence in America.
Zappas, try thinking once in awhile. Unemployment and jobless claims WILL increase as a result of the sequester but NOT right away; just as with economic recessions, it doesn't happen over night. The Great Recession began in Dec 2007 but the full impact was not felt until the fall of 2008 and into 2009. Now, if Congress acts in the next weeks and months to resolve the drastic cuts BOTH SIDES say will cost jobs and hurt the economy and replace it with a balance of sensible cuts and revenues, then the impact will be lessened.
@ Jody
Thank you for the up to date info there. Interesting that Backhouse in his next post is claiming 1 million lost now. I'm glad I continue to defer to yer alls knowledge or I would no nothing. Way too funny
Denial is a terrible thing.
Jobs Cut Due to the Sequester:
C.B.O. estimates 750,000 job losses.
C.R.S. estimates 1.2 million job losses.
Add on losses from the ripple effect = related industries losing businesses & jobs, and you can add on another million losses.
********************************************************
Where you get all wound up and mixed up is the additionaly seven hundred and fifty thousand government jobs ALREADY CUT by Republican governors since 2011.
And the answer was, yes. "A grey area, "loophole", maybe, yes. But a yes none the less. I'm proud of Rand, he's not being ignored (yet) like his father who also asked the hard questions and "railed against" things he found to be unconstitutional, that make everyone else uncomfortable.
American's killing American's through "gun violence" is a completely separate issue, and it should be a state issue when it comes to what they want to do to stem the "violence"
Jody-
I'm sorry, but you say this ALL the time, you said it about his father too. I'm starting to think that this right here is why you pretty much belittle anything the Paul's say or do, because of your own prejudiced on what you think they are saying. And that's your God given right to feel any way you want.
Job-
There is no way they'll ever find out about our military, our government CAN NOT use our military against our own people. It drives me bat @!$%# crazy when people say this. Do you really think that our soldiers would go against us? I bet you ten thousand dollars that if you were to ask a hundred military member if they were told to turn their weapons on their own people at least 98 of them would tell you no.
and to add since it didn't let me edit-
Job- it TERRIFIES me that you would be okay with it even if they could do it.
Remember if they can do it FOR you they can do it TO you.
um- he was the lone senator resisting.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/vote-on-patriot-act-extension-delayed-as-rand-paul-pushes-for-amendment-on-gun-rights/2011/05/25/AGhzDJBH_blog.html
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2011/05/26/sen-rand-paul-delays-renewal-of-patriot-act-provisions/
Paul was helped out by various other Reps - not possible otherwise.
A fellow poster asked of me last week as to my concerns if any over activist judges and an article came over the wire via CBS this morning that addresses that issue and my feelings to the question.
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy said Wednesday that congressional lawmakers need to maintain the nation’s balance of power by being able to compromise, expressing concerns that the high court is increasingly the venue for deciding politically charged issues such as gay marriage, health care and immigration.
“I think it’s a serious problem. A democracy should not be dependent for its major decisions on what nine unelected people from a narrow legal background have to say,” Kennedy said. “And I think it’s of tremendous importance for our political system to show the rest of the world — and we have to show ourselves first — that democracy works because we can reach agreement on a principle basis.”
http://washington.cbslocal.com/2013/03/07/justice-kennedy-serious-problem-supreme-court-deciding-too-many-issues-that-can-be-decided-by-congress/
I have watched the Supreme Court for a number of decades and it is not so much that the Judges on either side are activists but that their nominations to the position have become exceedingly politicized by the failure of the other branches of government to be either courageous or wise. The Justice was wise not to bring up the VRA as it is before the Court, but this issue goes to the point. Had the Act in its entirety been extend to all States from its inception, then this would not be before the Court today. The reality that issues formerly acted upon by Congress are now passed onto the Court forces its members to seemingly take political sides, to be viewed as activists, and thereby diminishes the respect it deserves and furthers the Senates inability to decide on merit alone. A vicious circle has become the norm.
BCWC -
I think there are two major problems with the court. The first is this notion of a litmus test. We have come to the point that when a person changes his/her position they have become the dreaded flip-flopper. That's crap. As facts present themselves, we should be open to changing our minds. To refuse to examine a stance is the essence of wanton ignorance. There should be no litmus test.
The second problem is the ivory tower mentality of the court. They split hairs and seem to engage in arguments akin to the "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?" variety. There is a slavish devotion to stare decisis, which is a terrible problem. That leads to building on what may be a foundation of errors. To me, every decision goes back to the original Constitution and goes forward. It is folly to imagine that every decision and amendment is correct, moreso given the societal and tecnological changes that in many, if not most, cases were beyond the imagination of the framers.
On that note, I think Kennedy may be the swing vote that upholds VRA, and I hope if that is the case that Congress makes it clear that its provisions extend to all 50 states.
Reevaluation of your beliefs and stances is what makes you grow as a person. I don't want judges who can't grow as people.
David, I agree with your points and especially with the Founding Father's understanding that all was not set in stone. As a non-American, I find the most powerful and hopeful words in the Constitution to be in the opening lines of the preamble ...
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, ..."
The Framers knew that it was not a perfect document and therefor inserted the ability to amend it. The union will never be perfect but the perfection within the Constitution is the ability it provides to pursue it. The only danger is fear and a lack of a few good men and women to keep it on course.
I don't like Rand Paul much, disagree with most of his politics and I think he is a total fraud as a doctor (I've worked in medicine for almost 30 years - no way would I go to a doctor of any kind who was not board certified, which he is not, and I would not want any member of my family to either), however, he did perform a fillibuster in the correct way and I honestly must give him the credit he deserves for that. I guess I'm just confused by so many folks that don't like drones, I happen to think they are the best way to fight a war - if we were not fighting bad folks we would not be fighting, right? And if someone is pulling another Timmothy McVie I'd much rather a drone take them out in advance rather than let him blow up another building. We lost most of our confidentiality a long, long time ago and with the passing of the Patriot Act we were already headed down this path, no way to reverse it now and feel safe. If he were gong to protest something I'd tell him to not let the FAA allow pocket knives back on those planes - that is pretty stupid if you ask me, regardless of who is allowing it (D or R).
Hey Numbskull, Rand Paul specialized in cataract and glaucoma surgeries, LASIK procedures, and corneal transplants.
Paul had two malpractice lawsuits filed. Paul was cleared in one case and the other was settled for $50,000. I seriously doubt you have been in the "medicine for 30 years". With one case cleared and the other with $50,000, you would know the complaints were pretty much baseless.
He received his first job from Dr. John Downing of Downing McPeak Vision Centers, which brought him to Bowling Green after completing his residency. Paul worked for Downing for about five years before parting ways. Afterwards, he went to work at the Gilbert Graves Clinic, a private medical group in Bowling Green, for 10 years before creating his own practice in a converted one-story house across the street from Downing's office.
Regardless, his medical work has been praised by Downing and Paul has medical privileges at two Bowling Green hospitals.
In 1995, Paul passed the American Board of Ophthalmology (ABO) boards on his first attempt and earned board-certification under the ABO for a decade. In 1997, to protest the ABO's decision to grandfather in older ophthalmologists and not require them to recertify, Paul, along with 200 ophthalmologists formed the National Board of Ophthalmology (NBO). Paul's ophthalmology board is not officially recognized by the American Board of Medical Specialties (ABMS). The NBO was incorporated in 1999, but Paul allowed it to be dissolved in 2000 after not filing the required paperwork with the Kentucky Secretary of State's office. Paul later recreated the board in September 2005, three months before his certification from the ABO was scheduled to expire. His ABO certification lapsed on December 31, 2005. Paul has since been certified by the NBO.
As a member of the Bowling Green Noon Lions Club, Paul founded the Southern Kentucky Lions Eye Clinic to help provide eye surgery and exams for those who cannot afford to pay.[24] He is a regular presenter at the annual Men's Health and Safety Day conference held by The Medical Center of Bowling Green since 1998.
THAT is a great career. You know nothing.
The topic is use on American soil against Americans.
Those aren't the only two options. The justification for the execution of Americans abroad using drone strikes is that the ability to apprehend the suspect was near impossible. You ask Yemen to let you go in and get somebody, they'll insist their guys do it, or just refuse outright. On American soil there is no reason we cannot apprehend somebody suspected of plotting to blow up buildings. On American soil if we can be certain enough as to their position to blow them up with a missile, we can take them in for questioning and charge them. You know, the PROPER way.
Andy Borowitz
BorowitzReport.com
Posted: May 22, 2010 08:45 AM
MINNEAPOLIS - (The Borowitz Report) - "In a sign of his increasing prominence in the so-called Tea Party movement, a new poll shows Kentucky senatorial candidate Rand Paul topping former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin among voters who describe themselves as morons.
In the poll, conducted by the University of Minnesota's Opinion Research Institute, 42% preferred Paul, 36% preferred Palin, and the remaining 22% were unsure what the word "prefer" meant.
According to Davis Logsdon, who supervised the poll for the University of Minnesota, Paul's surging popularity among morons is bad news for Palin, who previously had a lock on that important constituency.
"I never thought I'd say that, but if Palin is going to stay competitive with Paul, she's going to have to start dumbing down her message."
Pubie - I do know more than you think I do. Yes, I have worked in medicine nearly 30 years, still do and not too far from BG. So glad you think it is ok to go to a doctor (especially an eye doctor) who can't be bothered to be board certified. In the medical profession that is known as a "Doc in the box". which is always a good way for an insurance company to hire them to be the peer to peer reviewer (great for the insurance companies cause they often know nothing about the proceedure than needs to be apprroved for the patient). Glad he is your hero, but that alone would keep me from ever having much respect for him. We clean up messes from doctors like him all the time - an extra expense for the insurance companies as well as the problems for the patients.
Come on now, are you really Rand or his wife? Or perhaps someone who wishes to be either? I get it that you worship him, but you know, the Lions have been around for a long, long time. Longer than I've been born and I know I'm older than Rand so i seriousley doubt he did quite as much as you profess - but heck, go on buddy, everyone needs a cheerleader from time to time even a fraud like Rand.
union -- i agree with your comments on paul. proper filibuster and not a doctor i would use.
i think drones for war make sense but i do not like the idea of drones in American skies ready to strike if the person in charge, regardless of who that may be, can simply state that a target meets the soft criteria we have seen so far and simply execute them. in America it is all about law and due process, not summary executions. we hear there is no intent on the part of this administration to use them in this way but what about future administrations? a precedent is being set here with holder stating that the president has the legal authority.
with respect to mcveigh, would what we knew about him prior to the bombing have allowed a president to take him out? i do not know but i rather doubt it as law enforcement would have intervened. i would hope that a president would not withhold information, like mcveigh, from law enforcement just to use this authority.
So I guess the next time there is a hostage situation and a gun man is holding people hostage with a gun to one of their heads, the Police had better be careful. Let’s say the Police Sniper has a hostage taker in his sights, and is waiting for the order to take the shot, then that order should not be given.
job1 -- there are laws and procedures in place for law enforcement to use deadly force. that is not what this is about. this is about the federal government executing people without due process.
So a local Police Department can execute someone without due process, and the Federal Government should not? That is like saying that the that the Law Enforcement Sniper can't be an FBI Agent because that Agent is a Federal Agent. But, instead that Law Enforcement Sniper, has to be a Local Police.
There is no difference, because the bad guy gets taken out.
Job1, I'm trying to follow your argument, but all I can assume is that you are blinded by your partisan ideals or you are retarded. The two situations you are trying to compare are not even similar by any stretch of the imagination. Reread your posts and see if you don't agree with me.
there's a small problem with your analogy Job1, a sniper takes out one person, a drone would take out the bad guy and all the hostages around him/her.
KCBones, is it possible that Job1 isn't exactly sure how a drone works? I'm going to try and give him/her a benefit of the doubt.
Oh no...still no mention today of the supposed smoking gun e-mail from Charles Brown in the Department of Agriculture that kind of maybe sort of allegedly says to "Make The Cuts Hurt". Watch it, First Read...Conservative heads will explode.
I smoked 30 last cigarettes waiting for that gun to fire from the right-wing smear-media squad. Of course, it hasn't stopped a few of those on the right from making outlandish accusations like "Obama sends email threatening terminations for failure to stay on message".
Even the writers of the so called 'breaking' piece could only go so far as to say "a memo seems to suggest...". Well which is it - it either does or it doesn't.
Yes, I have been waiting for more details. Anyone with a bit of common sense knows how Fox Comedy, and the Rush Nuts gin up their base with lies.
Stand and fight for what is just and right Rand.
We stand with you!
Rand Paul is a good ole Nutty Buddy.
Ya, and uncle Joe Biden has all his marbles in place...
So, Ayn Rand Paul has begun his 2016 presidential campaign already? Lovely.
Nope, simply protecting the rights of the people, namely, Jurisprudence.
No, he is doing everything he can to become the darling of the extreme. I don't think that an actual filibuster was extreme mind you, but he does need some support from regular folks too. I like the one where he thinks the president should have asked for Hillary's resignation. Hope you don't face her in 2016, Aynnie Rand Paul!
I agree with his stance and I respect him for physically holding the floor. But I still wouldn't vote for him in a trillion years.
His name is Randal, his parents and siblings called him Randy, his WIFE started with the Rand, he is NOT named after Ayn Rand, though he very much enjoys your stories:
per Rand: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oD-R_OeP6tU
Back when Rand Paul came on the big scene, Bill Maher had something interesting to say concerning Paul.
"Have you heard about this guy? Dr. Rand Paul. He's the new folk hero of America, the son of Ron Paul. How to describe Rand Paul? I mean, he's a doctor. It's as if Sarah Palin somehow made it through medical school.
"He's an ophthalmologist, he does a lot of lasik surgery, and he has a lot of interesting points of view. Like he thinks Obama, because he went to Copenhagen where they were talking about global warming, is apologizing for the industrial revolution. He's against the Americans With Disabilities Act. He says restaurants should be able to refuse service to black people. And today, he said Obama was un-American for getting on BP's case for the oil spill. I tell you, the s**t doesn't fall far from the bat."
"Every time this guy opens his mouth, it gets a little crazier. Today he angrily demanded that the liberal media stop quoting him in context.
"I guess he's trying to get the press to get off the racism thing, so his big thing today was that the oil spill in the Gulf was the blame game. He said, 'Sometimes accidents happen.' Which is not really what you want to hear from the guy who's doing your lasik surgery."
Job 1,
When you look at folks like Paul from the broader perspective, you wonder if they will ever deign to breathe the same 21st century air as the rest of us.
the s**t doesn't fall far from the bat? I LOVE THAT!
Well, in Rand Paul's defense, he is cute. And drones are scary. They are planes with no people inside.
Witless progressives get their political "knowledge" from unfunny comedians..which would be funny, if it wasnt pathetic.
Seriously, Amy---you think he is attractive? Every time I see him I wonder if that is his real hair.
I may have lower standards than you do, Steeler : )
Paul reminds me of a leprachan, he's impish.
Same here Steeler Fan, then there is that glazed over look he is constantly sporting... BLECH!
Hey VP Bob,
You gonna tell us what is up with you re-regging again or you gonna run away as usual? lmao@u
SF,
OK - but pls don't mention toupees. I will need oxygen.
Hey VP Bob,
How are things in Virginia. I hear you guys are running a real loon tune for governor in Ken Cuccinelli.
Bill Mahar? ROTFLMAO
There is a man all Americans can trust. If he was physically attacked in any way, he would be looking for ex Santa Maria to stand in front of him to deflect any damage
A dumba$$ comment by Job1 that cites Bill Maher as a source brings out all the crazies. Fisty, Amy, Job1, and Backdoor all seem fascinated by Rand's hair. No comment at all regarding Rand's views on the current administrations position that they can actually visualize situations where the Constitution would be completely ignored. I guess it's really not that much of a stretch since the former constitutional law professor seems to have concentrated all his scholarly effort on how to circumvent the constitution rather than uphold it.
No - not interested in Rand's hair.
For my part, just the fascination with clowning, comedy and toupees.
No apologies.
Q. What about the filibusters used every day for the last 4 years by GOP -- to block ALL THE PRESIDENT'S NOMINATIONS?
here is Rand Paul's voting history:
http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/117285/rand-paul#.UTjwQRw3vWY
Now every time the Republicans attempt a filibuster, Harry Reid should ask, "will this be a real filibuster, or one of those fake filibusters"?
And everytime there is a filibuster, Democrats should ask Harry Reid why he didn't have the guts to lead real filibuster reform at the start of the 113th Congress. What a wimp this guy is. This goes for all congressional Democrats. Obama is doing one helluva good job considering that he is having to paddle the canoe all by himself. He gets virtually no help from Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, or any other congressional Democrat. I've done a nose count in both chambers ~ Obama is having to do daily battle with no less than fourteen active GOPers but his congressional Democratic colleagues are heard from AFTER the battle has been fought. More often than not, what is heard from then is after-the-fact criticism of Republicans who had the temerity to stand up in defense of their position. Its probably correct to singularly blame Obama for things ~ for its a damned certainty he is getting no help from his party on any issue.
Interesting comment from one of the Republican Senators who attended the dinner last night with Obama. When asked about the conversation, this United States Senator (who, for some reason is not named in news reports) said that it was very informative. In fact, he said, he learned for the first time what Obama had proposed to the Republican Senate leadership regarding budget5 cuts!
Hard to negotiate with someone who has no idea what is being proposed.
As Bill O'Reilly has pointed out in his last few shows, Obama purported "budget cuts" are like Bigfoot sightings...rare, and in reality a myth.
Bruce, What did you call Nancy Pelosi when she said they had to vote on a bill to find out what was in it? As it turns out that is what happened.
Pelosi was Speaker once upon a time. I am much more interested in the lines of communication between the White House and Congress today. Time to talk and to listen to each other is long overdue.
Yes, VP Bob,
Oh Billo the clown has been the burnt of The Big Joke for the past few days. Fox Comedy at it's finest hour.
"But can you say the same about the other Republicans who participated in the filibuster? Would they have blasted a Republican administration’s drone policy?"
Leave it to the lefties at First Read to spin this situation in that manner.
How about, the Democrats and liberals who pretended to be civil libertarians when Bush was President? Now just party hacks defending unlimited Presidential power!
Give it s a rest, Comeback. Everyone knows that Republicans will back a GOP president's policies to the end of the earth and the very same can be said of Democrats with respect to a Democratic president. Hell, there are some on both sides of the fence that are still defending Carter and Nixon ~ so there is no enlightenment in your statement. For the record, I didn't see any Republicans challenging the ever increasing presidential power claimed during the Bush administration, either. Some of that broadening power grab was orchestrated by the vice-president, Cheney. Its a "club" and once admitted, a member is expected to back the club's leadership or get out. The only difference between Democrats and today's Republican ~ ~ if you don't back the club's leadership, its other members will help in getting you out.
Not necessarily. We're just not buying the president's long-time bitter opponents as a new breed of civil libertarians.
I think in this case, Sen. Paul publicized a legitimate issue in an appropriate way. The government should make absolutely clear the situations in which it feels it is legally justified in killing American citizens on American soil. And just saying "terrorism" is far from a sufficient explanation. Quite frankly, I have always felt that just saying "terrorism" is not a sufficient explanation for anything. I said that when I criticized Dubya, and I am saying it again now.
Unfortunately, no one filibustered Iraq war and detainee, drone policies then. Because under W - it was "how dare you criticize a war-time president??!?!?". And, entertainers were pilloried and/or blackballed out of job and future work.
Doesn't it all seem like misplaced (and years too late) outrage? Where were all these people back then when these policies were put in place??? #GOPnocredibilityondebtorcivilrights
100% in agreement news girl. "If you ain't with us, you're against us". We have now recovered our world prestige lost over the Iraq debacle. And don't even think about calling it an Obama apology tour, BS.
Ron Paul tried to newsgirl.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TZ5cpaPlf4
I affiliate with neither party. The reason is the amount of hate and animosity that comes from BOTH sides. Both sides wish violence and death on the other. Both sides say ignore the other. Both sides are so very hypocritical. I used to consider myself an optimist. Always trying to look for the positive. But in today's America and after reading these comments I truly feel that is almost impossible.
Rand Paul publicity stunt (aided by tag-team members of Repub Senate) a success! Leads every new outlet and great clips for 2016 run!
COngrats - now maybe some governing - ya know, what you're paid for -
Rand Paul is an inconsequential as tits on a bowling ball. Billy Shakespeare described him well"
"Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player, that struts and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” (Macbeth)
But Lil' Rand serves one purpose in life. He makes his father appear to be a first tier intellectual.
And who wants to bet that this little teabag senator has zilch for a bill to put forth in the senate on his so called worries about them 'nazi's', for some reason he felt compelled to 'drone' on about, using them drones to take Jane and others out!!
Does he have a clue as to what we're paying him for, we know his supporters don't, they wouldn't have hired him with his resume!!
The Southern Poverty Law Center yesterday reported that since the election of President Obama, there's a white-hot, exponential proliferation of hate-based, racist citizen militia groups using the Second Amendment to arm themselves for the potential over throw of the US government. Yet, Rand Paul and Republicans waste 13 hours bloviating and pontificating about the extremely, unlikely use of drones against American citizens. Based on reality, I'd say the real threat to American social stability is on the ground, not in the air.
Some of us new Second Lieutenants wondered aloud about our oath ~ to "defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic" ~ just who these 'domestic' enemies are/were/will be. I think we now have our answer. The problem is they can hide behind and vest themselves in the First and Second Amendments while developing a self-serving doctrine of "protecting" those very Articles. It now appears that "Anarchy, thy name is militia." We already have examples of their radical ventures and maniacal obsessions. Ruby Ridge, Waco, and Oklahoma City are but minor examples for they were generally the work of one idiot. Imagine when several of the same latent insanity bond together for seditious purposes.
Southern Poverty Law Center? Seriously Diane,thats where you are getting your info?
Soooo, are you challenging the source or the alleged facts they presented, broker1? Bring to the table facts that dispel those offered by SPLC and you can lodge a legitimate protest. Condemning a source without any evidence that their reporting is inaccurate merely establishes your contempt for the organization. It does nothing to dispel the assumed accuracy of their report.
broker1, would you care to elaborate on your derision?
Hello Jim
Yes I highly dispute their facts. They actually have a North Carolina group(Granny Warriors) listed as a hate group.They are a bunch of ladies who help the poor and elderly.Also, if a militant group has a chapter in different states,they count it as 50 militant groups.
broker1, I went to the website http://www.grannywarriors.com/. They start off about the death of our nation being a result of political correctness. Under their "Events" link, they spew (in part) "We are determined to make a dent in the propaganda of the USDA, PETA, H$U$ and other like minded organizations with cult like mentality."
Looks like your usual paranoid, anti-government, militia-leaning collection of whack jobs. The Sisters Of Charity they ain't! Which makes me wonder about YOUR sources of information.
I think more Americans are beginning to see how Mr. Obama works; the old divide and conquer strategy. Fortunately for us taxpayers that have skin in the game, the public saw through his overhyping the effects of the much needed spending cuts and his approval rating has fallen 7 points (as it should). I would adopt a wait and see tact with Mr. Obama. The number one driver of the deficit (and Obama said so in 2009) are entitlements, specifically Medicare. Time to lead Mr. Obama and make a specific commitment to reform Medicare by either rasing the eligibiity age or reducing benefits for wealthy seniors. Once you do that, I am sure the Rebublicans would love to talk about reforming the tax code which will benefit all tax payers.
Only if it protects their pets, Chris. There is opportunity for targeted revisions in the tax code right now but those are being rejected out of hand because they will directly impact the most revered of all earthly creations ~ corporate entities and the titans of industry that own/invest/run them. I notice you fail to mention one of the most expensive parts of Medicare ~ ~ the unfunded prescription drug program. But of course, look at who put that in place? Silly me.
Jim in Texas...I am aware George Bush created a huge problem with the prescription drug program and left Obama with an $11 trillion dollar debt. However, that is not an excuse to run up another $6 trillion in debt. I would expect Obama would want to fix our deficit spending problem (I believe he said he wanted to). So far, I have not seen any specifics, just talk.
If you look more closely, Chris, you will find that deficit reduction under Obama has been nearly a half-trillion dollars and that was before sequestration. For the record, I think it should be zero but that's probably fantasy. Considering the circumstances of the overall economy during Obama's first term ~ especially in his first year ~ debt and deficit expansion was of necessity. I'm no economist and make no claim as being skilled in that arena, but those who are have stated on record that had not the measures chosen been employed we would likely have slipped into a full blown depression. We came damned close even with all of the financial bandaids applied. I am in favor of the sequesters for I firmly believe they are the only way we will actually see any reduction in federal spending. I believe that any other alternative would merely have rearranged priorities and the price tag would not have dropped at all.
All we want is the President to come out and say that the he, nor any future presidents has the ability under our Constitution to order a military strike, drone or jet or otherwise, against the American people on American soil.
They can already spy on us, pat us down beyond decency at airports, wiretap us, etc. All we ask is that they don't blow us up. I mean hell, the entire point of the drones is to kill terrorists in foreign nations where it would be too risky to send in soldiers. What kind of target would be in the U.S.A. that the FBI or police forces couldn't reach on foot and would need to use a drone?
We just want confirmation that the President, whoever it is, will never order such an attack on Americans.
Exactly! I don't see what is so hard about this. Every American should be concerned about giving this power to the executive branch.
Another tea bagger that will be voted out soon,,,
Keep you one line and idiotic posts going. With people out there like you, I am now 100% sure the GOP will retain the House plus take control of the Sentate.
You and the tea nagger jerk offs,,the rest of America will be voting turds like this out,,now go,back to,your retarded red state,,
Bulletman...I know many people who dislike Rand Paul as much as you obviously do, but were still happy that he was doing what he was doing.
Instead of demonizing everyone who disagrees with you, maybe you should consider what they are saying.
In this case, Mr. Paul was raising a very real concern about the Executive Branch believing they have the power to assassinate US citizens in the USA without an imminent direct threat. The President could have avoided all of this with a simple no. I don't hold that President Obama would actually use this, however we may find that giving this power to the Executive Branch today, has dire consequences tomorrow. We should not give up our rights of due process.
I don't recall that every being stated or implied by Obama, Holder, or any other administration official. It is an assumption some have drawn and there is nothing to substantiate it. I don't know how "extraordinary circumstances" will be defined but "assassination without an imminent direct threat" would be not only grounds for impeachment but possibly criminal prosecution. If such a threat existed and no attempt to neutralize it was made then we would be screaming malfeasance and incompetence ~ obviously not grounds for either impeachment or prosecution. Were they, we would have hamstrung Bush for ignoring five months of warning about "imminent attack" in 2001. A "citizen" who takes up arms against the United States or plots for overthrow of its government should be deemed to have forfeited his/her citizenship and is no longer worthy of protection by the very Constitution he/she chooses to obliterate.
So the President finally realized that traveling around the country demonizing the opposition wasn't a good negotiation strategy? SHOCKING.
While the President should certainly use the bully-pulpit to his advantage, you still must have talks that generate results. In the end the President must be a leader first and politician second. I mean how do you expect the Republicans to even negotiate when you have the President calling them names. Certainly there are those on the right doing the same, but not all of them. GWB had the same nastiness in his second term, yet he was able to get some stuff done (while I would argue much of the bipartisan stuff he got done was garbage). Obama has been a utter failure as a leader, regardless of how you feel about his policies.
Finally someone in the Republicans party is working, albeit for show. I think the cuts the GOP is advocating in the budget should first, be their own wages, and benefits for lack of work!!! They are more on vacation then actually working. I wish we could fire all of the hateful, mean spirited, obstructionist, racist, and mindless, walk in lock step representatives and get some that actually are working for the Commons good for the people, not for perpetuating some of the self serving get rich by not actually serving the people, only their own self interest.
Do you really believe that Rand Paul was doing this for show? While he knew he couldn't stop the nomination, if there is one thing you know about Rand Paul is that he is willing to fight against items he feels infringe upon the liberty of Americans.
In addition, I would argue that the vast majority of representatives on both sides are doing what they think is best for the country. Difference is that one side views government as the solution to many problems, while the other side tends to think of it as the cause of many of the problems. These are opposite opinions that are difficult to unite around a common solution.
This is JUST INCREDIBLE ! Over and over and over again and again and again these REPUKES and TEA-SHYSTERS are in OFFICE to stop the PRESIDENT and this NATION from getting ANYTHING DONE.
The GOP are really INSANE. They want to HALT GOVERNING THIS NATION. It is SO OBVIOUS with the GOP SIDE that they will do anything and still they are PAID to stop the Government from OPERATING.
What is WRONG with these EXTREMIST PARTY of RIGHT. They act LIKE COMMUNIST PARTY. They want SO BAD TO TAKE OVER THIS NATION and make it CAPITAL COMMUNISM. WOW !!!!! They no longer believe in their fellow CITIZENS for OFFICE to replace other MANAGERS leaving. They no longer believe in this NATION only about THEMSELVES and there communist ways.
Is this DEMOCRACY or HELL lets RUIN this NATION !!!! For GODS sake DRONES ON AMERICANS, PLEASE PAUL your INSANE like the REST of you and your cockroaches !!!!
Wait wait.
Why wouldn't the President just say no to using drones in the USA? That would have been the end of this.
Alain Deflandre......damn....I think you need to up your meds. Your diatribe and words of wisdom will fit right in Cuba. Perhaps they will have an opening soon down there. You have a bright future.