4 marines killed in Tn

[Guest]

Four US Marines killed in Tn. At least 3 others injured. Another act of terrorism? Probably

[Guest]

Four US Marines killed in Tn. At least 3 others injured. Another act of terrorism? Probably

It is not politically correct, but the shooters name is Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez.

[Guest]

Tn is loaded with Muslims. Yes it was terrorism once Again. NY times square on Alert! Will go on and on. Americans just don't care until its their family. Obama doing great job protecting us!

[Guest]

By the way, another shooting and multiple deaths in another gun free zone.

[Guest]

It is not politically correct, but the shooters name is Muhammad Youssef Abdulazeez.

A right-wing extremist?

[Guest]

A right-wing extremist?

Get your kicks. Funny stuff, isn't it ?

ADMIN, PLEASE let us know who these posters are.

Some are just sick

[Guest]

Many more people have been killed by domestic terrorists. Tim McVeigh killed 168 and injured 600 in the Oklahoma bombing.

[Guest]

McVeigh was pre 9/11. Let me clarify that more Americans were killed on US soil by domestic terrorists than foreign since 9/11.

[Guest]

Many more people have been killed by domestic terrorists. Tim McVeigh killed 168 and injured 600 in the Oklahoma bombing.

I apologize. It is ok. Nothing to see or worry about here. So, let's just accept it. Muslim terrorist are AOK, compared to McVeigh....never thought of it like that.

Put those sentiments on cards to survivors. I am sure they will be consoled by those thoughts.

[Guest]

Get your kicks. Funny stuff, isn't it ?

ADMIN, PLEASE let us know who these posters are.

Some are just sick

What are you going to do? Go beat him/her up?

[Guest]

I just read that the shooter was a naturalized US citizen from Kuwait.

[Guest]

Isn't that sick to think its OK to kill our Marines?? Nothing justifies this and I, as an American, demand our government starts doing their job and protect us. Do not make excuses for Muslim Terrorists

[Guest]

Come on, stop blaming President for everything. It is damn near impossible to stop a lone wolf terrorist especially if that person has a brain in their head. Why not blame the NRA? How did he get the weapons he used? Why didn't FBI catch this person in the background check before he bought the guns, if the purchases for recent?

Your hatred for President Obama doesn't justify blaming him for everything.

[Guest]

Isn't that sick to think its OK to kill our Marines?? Nothing justifies this and I, as an American, demand our government starts doing their job and protect us. Do not make excuses for Muslim Terrorists

If the shooter was a naturalized US citizen, he was an American!

I would start by placing blame on the National Rifle Association since they demand guns be made available to all Americans.

[Guest]

Come on, stop blaming President for everything. It is damn near impossible to stop a lone wolf terrorist especially if that person has a brain in their head. Why not blame the NRA? How did he get the weapons he used? Why didn't FBI catch this person in the background check before he bought the guns, if the purchases for recent?

Your hatred for President Obama doesn't justify blaming him for everything.

Nor does your's for the NRA.

[Guest]

McVeigh was pre 9/11. Let me clarify that more Americans were killed on US soil by domestic terrorists than foreign since 9/11.

Who the H*ll cares if it was pre 911 he was a right wing domestic terrorist!!

[Guest]

Come on, stop blaming President for everything. It is damn near impossible to stop a lone wolf terrorist especially if that person has a brain in their head. Why not blame the NRA? How did he get the weapons he used? Why didn't FBI catch this person in the background check before he bought the guns, if the purchases for recent?

Your hatred for President Obama doesn't justify blaming him for everything.

Please direct those of us who are not as smart as you to the post that blamed the President ?

[Guest]

If the shooter was a naturalized US citizen, he was an American!

I would start by placing blame on the National Rifle Association since they demand guns be made available to all Americans.

And the contrarian tries yet again to swing the spot light off the real target (pun intended) to some BS story.

Let us take your presentation of him being an American.....you don't really expect any sentient being with a heratbeat to accept because he was an American that he wasn't an ISIS representative?

Do you have some notion that ISIS would be promoting positioning their kind to either be an American recruit or encouraging Muslims to become an American to become better imbedded.

It must be very uncomfortable seeing everything through your belly button!

[Guest]

Several things were notable after today's terrorist attack.

The FBI was in charge in less than 6 hours....a first!
The news release was almost instantaneous that the shooter was a lone wolf....way before any investigation.
And Obama as with incidents he has an investment in had his face in the camera within hours.

I am not a proponent of conspiracy type thinking but I do 100% subscrbe to managed situations. Right or wrong the sequence of events do beg questioning why or how these things occurred so quickly and not normal?

[Guest]

Several things were notable after today's terrorist attack.

The FBI was in charge in less than 6 hours....a first!
The news release was almost instantaneous that the shooter was a lone wolf....way before any investigation.
And Obama as with incidents he has an investment in had his face in the camera within hours.

I am not a proponent of conspiracy type thinking but I do 100% subscrbe to managed situations. Right or wrong the sequence of events do beg questioning why or how these things occurred so quickly and not normal?


The Department of Justice (FBI) took the lead in this investigation because the victims were US military personnel.

[Guest]

If the shooter was a naturalized US citizen, he was an American!

I would start by placing blame on the National Rifle Association since they demand guns be made available to all Americans.

And if he had used a pressure cooker bomb, would you blamed Betty Crooker?

[Guest]

I don't dislike the NRA. I don't like their threats to make sure any House or Senate member, who doesn't go along with them, will be a target in the next election. One issue voters are worth a damn. They are just closed minded individuals. I threw the NRA in my post, because you could blame four or five government agencies, and guns for these murders. Placing all the blame on President Obama for everything seems to be the path Republican elected officals and their followers take all to often.

[Guest]

Our military should Not be unarmed when we are at war. Why is Obama at fault? Because Obama won't admit we are at war. Our guys are sitting ducks. Unacceptable

[Guest]

Come on, stop blaming President for everything. It is damn near impossible to stop a lone wolf terrorist especially if that person has a brain in their head. Why not blame the NRA? How did he get the weapons he used? Why didn't FBI catch this person in the background check before he bought the guns, if the purchases for recent?

Your hatred for President Obama doesn't justify blaming him for everything.

He is Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces and the leader of this country. Why would he NOT be responsible to some degree when things like this happen? I don't know about you, but when I vote for President of the US, one of my main considerations is his ability and desire to protect this country and it's citizens. Maybe next time around we should be more careful who we choose.

[Guest]

He is Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces and the leader of this country. Why would he NOT be responsible to some degree when things like this happen? I don't know about you, but when I vote for President of the US, one of my main considerations is his ability and desire to protect this country and it's citizens. Maybe next time around we should be more careful who we choose.


...and exactly what would YOU have a President do so this tragedy would not have happened?

It looks as though the 24 year old shooter came to the US in 2001. Who was President in 2001? Under whose watch did the Twin Towers tragedy happen?
Kind of hard to blame Pres. Obama, isn't it?

[Guest]

...and exactly what would YOU have a President do so this tragedy would not have happened?

It looks as though the 24 year old shooter came to the US in 2001. Who was President in 2001? Under whose watch did the Twin Towers tragedy happen?
Kind of hard to blame Pres. Obama, isn't it?

No, it's not. Maybe for you, but not me, and I think I'm still allowed to have an opinion in this country - at least for now. We are talking about THIS tragedy and it did happen on HIS watch. If he doesn't feel some sense of responsibility then he doesn't deserve to be our President. It is my opinion that President Obama has done nothing but put this country in a position of weakness on so many fronts. Again, in my opinion, this is only the beginning.

[Guest]

I think it was Nixon who said, "I will taken responsibility for something when it goes wrong, but not the blame. People, who take the blame, get fired." With responsibility, doesn't come condemnation. Why don't you get off the man's ass. Blaming him for this, isn't going to get you anywhere.

This was a very well educated lone wolf. This wasn't some moron, that stuffed a bomb in his shoes. There possibly won't be any fault to go around. However, soldiers off post doing military business in a fixed location, should be armed. The threat from ISIS is there, and isn't going away.

[Guest]

I think it was Nixon who said, "I will taken responsibility for something when it goes wrong, but not the blame. People, who take the blame, get fired." With responsibility, doesn't come condemnation. Why don't you get off the man's ass. Blaming him for this, isn't going to get you anywhere.

This was a very well educated lone wolf. This wasn't some moron, that stuffed a bomb in his shoes. There possibly won't be any fault to go around. However, soldiers off post doing military business in a fixed location, should be armed. The threat from ISIS is there, and isn't going away.

Not sure to whom you are directing your comments, but if it's me, you will note in my post above yours that I did specifically say responsibility not blame, and that is exactly what I meant. Your last 2 statements I agree with totally.

[Guest]

It was you about responsibility. There was nothing wrong with your post. I just wanted to point out a great president wanted to make sure that everyone knew there is a difference between responsibility and blame. When that great president spoke, everybody listened.

This is off thread, but Donald Trump brought up another thing that great president claimed as his own "The Silent Majority". It made me laugh. This was pure genius on Nixon's part. One hundred people could be in a room. They all could speak in disagreement or agree , but you could still say the silent majority was behind you. Why? Because as soon as they spoke, they became part of the vocal minority. I don't know , if Trump claiming the silent majority as his own, will work, but it is a smart thing to claim. If anyone disagrees with Trump, and opens their mouth, they are part of the vocal minority.

[Guest]

It is correct to say that Obama is not directly responsible for this tragedy in TN. However his policies and attitude toward the subject matter of Islamic terrorist is clear because he goes out of his way to protect the Islam. The massacre at Fort Hood being listed as work place violence is one example.
And hence is mishandling of this matter makes him indirectly responsible.

Obama has made it clear that protection of our homeland is secondary to his domestic agenda. His focus is on turning America into a toothless European nation He does not operate from a position of inexperience or incompetence. No his actions are intentional, well planned out movements to transform America. If one compares Alinsky's 7 steps to socialism they will see that in every respect Obama has followed that blueprint

Progressives too busy with gun control ,attacking religious freedoms, gender and gay issues can't and won't see the damage Obama is creating.

The tragedy in TN points out that we should reconsider NSA's programs and that profiling does work. This killers father was on the government radar and if we had a president that was more vigilant 4 people might be alive today.

As a member of the silent majority I will be silent no more and I don't care whose feelings get hurt because America's children are going to be deprived of the true blessings of this nation if progressive continue their march to destroy traditional values, patriotism and this nation's Judeo-Christian beliefs

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

No, it's not. Maybe for you, but not me, and I think I'm still allowed to have an opinion in this country - at least for now. We are talking about THIS tragedy and it did happen on HIS watch. If he doesn't feel some sense of responsibility then he doesn't deserve to be our President. It is my opinion that President Obama has done nothing but put this country in a position of weakness on so many fronts. Again, in my opinion, this is only the beginning.


...again, exactly what would have the President do to have prevented this tragedy?

It looks as though the shooter was a naturalized US citizen and was in the country since 2001. He would have been around 9 years old at that time.

[Guest]

It is correct to say that Obama is not directly responsible for this tragedy in TN. However his policies and attitude toward the subject matter of Islamic terrorist is clear because he goes out of his way to protect the Islam. The massacre at Fort Hood being listed as work place violence is one example.
And hence is mishandling of this matter makes him indirectly responsible.

Obama has made it clear that protection of our homeland is secondary to his domestic agenda. His focus is on turning America into a toothless European nation He does not operate from a position of inexperience or incompetence. No his actions are intentional, well planned out movements to transform America. If one compares Alinsky's 7 steps to socialism they will see that in every respect Obama has followed that blueprint

Progressives too busy with gun control ,attacking religious freedoms, gender and gay issues can't and won't see the damage Obama is creating.

The tragedy in TN points out that we should reconsider NSA's programs and that profiling does work. This killers father was on the government radar and if we had a president that was more vigilant 4 people might be alive today.

As a member of the silent majority I will be silent no more and I don't care whose feelings get hurt because America's children are going to be deprived of the true blessings of this nation if progressive continue their march to destroy traditional values, patriotism and this nation's Judeo-Christian beliefs

Personal Best Regards:
First you have to be silent to be silent no more.

[Guest]

First you have to be silent to be silent no more.

Perhaps he was silent and that was his first post?

[Guest]

Please don't let the contrarians tactic of switching the meaning or go off on a tangent that has nothing to do with the thread.

Their only goal is to disrupt.

[Guest]

Perhaps he was silent and that was his first post?
Probably more than 192.

[Guest]

Please don't let the contrarians tactic of switching the meaning or go off on a tangent that has nothing to do with the thread.

Their only goal is to disrupt.

AND they never stop or go away. NEVER on subject. ONLY to mock.

I read a comment in the normal talk area about not even trying on this forum. I suspect I am going that way also.

Mocking and making fun of people is NOT discussion, at least in the adult world.

[Guest]

It is correct to say that Obama is not directly responsible for this tragedy in TN. However his policies and attitude toward the subject matter of Islamic terrorist is clear because he goes out of his way to protect the Islam. The massacre at Fort Hood being listed as work place violence is one example.
And hence is mishandling of this matter makes him indirectly responsible.

Obama has made it clear that protection of our homeland is secondary to his domestic agenda. His focus is on turning America into a toothless European nation He does not operate from a position of inexperience or incompetence. No his actions are intentional, well planned out movements to transform America. If one compares Alinsky's 7 steps to socialism they will see that in every respect Obama has followed that blueprint

Progressives too busy with gun control ,attacking religious freedoms, gender and gay issues can't and won't see the damage Obama is creating.

The tragedy in TN points out that we should reconsider NSA's programs and that profiling does work. This killers father was on the government radar and if we had a president that was more vigilant 4 people might be alive today.

As a member of the silent majority I will be silent no more and I don't care whose feelings get hurt because America's children are going to be deprived of the true blessings of this nation if progressive continue their march to destroy traditional values, patriotism and this nation's Judeo-Christian beliefs

Personal Best Regards:

Great post. I wish I could articulate my thoughts as well as you do, but in effect you explained the meaning of my usage of the word "responsibility" in a previous post. It is more in an indirect manner that I was referring to as a result of his posturing on other related issues.

As far as the rest of your post goes, I stand with you and appreciate your ability to verbalize what many of us believe to be true. I don't think Obama has made it a secret what his intentions are and anyone who doesn't see it has either got their head in the sand or are so blinded by their ideology that they don't care what the ultimate outcome might be.

[Guest]

AND they never stop or go away. NEVER on subject. ONLY to mock.

I read a comment in the normal talk area about not even trying on this forum. I suspect I am going that way also.

Mocking and making fun of people is NOT discussion, at least in the adult world.
Satire

The use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.


Not everything is mockery. BTW, if there is a "normal" forum what should this one be called?

[Guest]

Satire

The use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.


Not everything is mockery. BTW, if there is a "normal" forum what should this one be called?

No matter what you call it, it doesn't seem appropriate on this forum when you are talking about the deaths of Americans and other serious matters.

[Guest]

Satire

The use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.


Not everything is mockery. BTW, if there is a "normal" forum what should this one be called?

Please do not consider the ongoing, routine rude disrespectful purposeful trash talk here as satire. Satire properly used does at times add value. The trash talk here NEVER ever adds value.

For the few, they view this forum as their Rude disrestful BS opportunity!

[Guest]

Please do not consider the ongoing, routine rude disrespectful purposeful trash talk here as satire. Satire properly used does at times add value. The trash talk here NEVER ever adds value.

For the few, they view this forum as their Rude disrestful BS opportunity!
I agree. But when certain posters blame Obama for everything as their default reasoning, chastise anyone for not agreeing with their views, and the only things in their arsenal are Saul Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, and the Black Panthers some satire is called for. And the constant mention that this is the worst of times and the end must be near never enhances the chance of a civil discussion.

[Guest]

No matter who is President makes it possible to thwart all the terrorist plans - be they from a young Radical Muslim, a right wing-extremist individual or group, or just a crazy murderer like the Sandy Hook shooter or the Colorado theater shooter.

[Guest]

I agree. But when certain posters blame Obama for everything as their default reasoning, chastise anyone for not agreeing with their views, and the only things in their arsenal are Saul Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, and the Black Panthers some satire is called for. And the constant mention that this is the worst of times and the end must be near never enhances the chance of a civil discussion.


Very good post.

[Guest]

Obama is 100% responsible for the safety of all Americans He can absolutely sign a piece of paper and make sure our military is armed now that Muslims are in a war to kill americans. He has a duty to protect us so don't give us the old "its not his fault". He took an oath to protect AMERICA and is failing miserably

[Guest]

I think my father was fooling around. I have brother by another mother, and he is posting here. I have to reiterate what he had to say. I don't think Mr. Best Wishes was ever a part of the silent majority. You don't read both sides of an argument, and keeping your opinions to yourself. Don't take the wrong way. Everyone should get involved, especially with the current state of politics. Open minded people are our only chance to restore sanity into government.

I do that small issue with your opinion about the 2009 killings at Fort Hood. It took six years to call it what it was terrorism, and do the right thing by the victims families. However, the terrorist in 2009 were Bin Laden's followers, and not ISIS. The feeling in 2009 President Obama was protecting Muslims in this country, and not protecting terrorists. There was some feeling the Pentagon was going on the cheap, and not paying the victims families by calling it work place violence. It took too long too fix their nonsense.

To call President a communist is beyond the pale. That is like calling the Republicans NAZIS, because all they want to do is increase military spending at the cost of the poor. If the threat to the poor from the Republicans is greater than ISIS could ever hope to accomplish, why shouldn't he protect them by placing an even amount of money in both areas. Isn't it a Christian belief, and Marine policy, the strong help and protect the weak? I am not a bleeding heart liberal. How do you know what the poor are going through, if you have never been there?

Didn't US citizens want us to get out of Iraq. "W" signed an agreement with Iraq's president giving a date certain to leave. I don't think ISIS was a great threat to us as they are now. Is it toothless to expect the sane countries in that area to get involved, and rendered ISIS toothless? Why do we have to be the world's policeman?

Why didn't the Republicans in the Senate approved giving President Obama war authority against Syria, when he asked for it? To make sure he couldn't cross the red line, so they could call he WEAK.

President Obama was called a center left politician, when he took office. He had done next to nothing, and people were yelling "give us our country back". My opinion the Republican party has moved much further right than him to the left. Who cares who more further in their direction of choice? They are so far apart next to nothing is working. How can that be good for anything?

[Guest]

He is Commander-in-Chief of our armed forces and the leader of this country. Why would he NOT be responsible to some degree when things like this happen? I don't know about you, but when I vote for President of the US, one of my main considerations is his ability and desire to protect this country and it's citizens. Maybe next time around we should be more careful who we choose.

Have you ever, and I really mean ever, actually seen Obama accept responsibility or accountability for anything?

[Guest]

Have you ever, and I really mean ever, actually seen Obama accept responsibility or accountability for anything?

Just another BS posting that adds no value to the discussion.:blahblahblah:

[Guest]

Just another BS posting that adds no value to the discussion.:blahblahblah:

Why not research and then respond ?

[Guest]

I agree. But when certain posters blame Obama for everything as their default reasoning, chastise anyone for not agreeing with their views, and the only things in their arsenal are Saul Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright, William Ayers, and the Black Panthers some satire is called for. And the constant mention that this is the worst of times and the end must be near never enhances the chance of a civil discussion.

In my humble opinion, you are so way off base on this.

Example...a question was asked why Alinsky was mentioned. This person obviously had never heard of this person. The question was answered as to the why, and that answer was just ignored and off to more "satire".

Alinsky,Ayers, Rev Wright are people who influenced our President,perhaps the MOST influential, thus in any discussion of why he does anything, they are MORE than pertinent, they are imperatives. I am sure that each of them also had positive influences, but those are the men that he has called "mentors" and confidants and ine case of Alinsky,he was an ardent believer.

I do not recall the Blavk Panthers being mentioned much except when they make their presence known or their actions ignored.

No, your words appear dramatic, but they ring VERY HOLLOW, and I encourage you to share examples, especially on the Black Panthers.

Actually, those examples have true merit, and especially HISTORICAL FACT to substantiate their use, and of corse,the can be overdone, but I think those radical things from the past have been handled smoothly.

Not sure why you use them, as most people object mostly to terms like "stupid", "Nazi" (oft used to discuss the previous admin EVEN WHEN THEY ARE NOT THE SUBJECT), "BS", "who cares", etc. etc, and ESPECIALLY, which is pretty much the case, when they are used with NOT EVEN ONE SHRED OF CONCRETE FACT, or a link that allowed you to believe whatever you believe.

If someone disapproves of someone that you like, and they supply the WHY they feel that way, MOST people would come back and present their case to oppose, instead of what you call sarcasm.

You are not required to post a rebuttal, but if you are, take some pride and go a bit beyond the wise cracks

As relates to "the worst of times,grow up. Many thought WW2 was the worst, and many still do. We are living in one of the most difficult times ever. The fears of WW2 seem to dwarf, only because of modern day technology; our world is "smaller", the "bad guys" have much more in the way of weaponary, and what was once our biggest defense....our isolated location...is now being taken away from us, not only with weapons, but with pourous borders, it is difficult.

We have here at home more civil strife, more dissolution of family morals, more aggressive minorities (and do not make that racist or any kind of term usually used..it refers to our media,both social and otherwise)..

It IS a very scary time...EXTREMELY. Saying it is not is simply ignoring facts.

I doubt if any of those who feel they are using satire has even read this far, but if you did, please consider the points. Whomever is President will be blamed for much more than they are responsible for, and receive credit for much more than they actually did....just the way it is.

I, for one, read every single post from those who disagree with my point of view. Unfortunately, there are not many; most are of the "satire" type. "Satire" does not fit well into a discussion forum, and I actually do not believe it was even an attempt at satire.

It comes across as someone who does not care to consider one single thing except for that which they pray to. It comes across as someone, as in high school who when they could not compete, they mocked. And be clear, THIS IS NOT A COMPETITION, BUT IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN EXCHANGE OF IDEAS, NOT WISE CRACKS.

I am sure the same thing can be said of the "other side", but I find, or should say found, that very few attempts are made to sway opinion, only to practice oneupmansship ship with words.

I am making this my last post, which certainly brings joy to many, but the same crap is beginning at the same level as it did before, and by the same people. There makes no sense to try to engage in any serious conversation, and to those who still try to mock me personally with emails back and forth and on Topix, let me make your day. I cede ...you win..have fun.

[Guest]

First you have to be silent to be silent no more.

Dear Guest: I do not know who you are but your comments speaks to what you are not. You did not address anything negative, positive or refutable about the content of my post other than your aforementioned remarks. You prefer a wisecrack that essentially is telling me to shut up. Your comments are devoid of intelligence,creativity and foresight and add no value to the subject matter of this topic. Essentially you prefer not to be taken seriously. One wonders if you played the class clown while attending high school and have become comfortable in that role? I certainly hope not for your sake.

Political Talk is a forum of opportunity for those members of TOTV that seek views other than theirs in order to have a better assessment of the events that our shaping our nation. There is so much information out there today that it is good to have others speak to what they have heard and read and what they take away from those accounts.

We do not have to agree and in fact through disagreement comes understanding provided those involved keep an open and unbiased mind.

You Dear Guest are not a contributor and you are unfortunately a minor distraction. If you seek attention please find it somewhere less adult than this forum.

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

Mr. Best Wishes: I know that were not talking to me, because we were posting at the same time, I think. Were the last two posts yours? Should I be defending myself? I have only been on this board a couple of weeks. I have no idea what happened in the past here. It looks like your are ignoring my post, due to what someone said.

[Guest]

Mr. Best Wishes: I know that were not talking to me, because we were posting at the same time, I think. Were the last two posts yours? Should I be defending myself? I have only been on this board a couple of weeks. I have no idea what happened in the past here. It looks like your are ignoring my post, due to what someone said.

Dear Guest: Addressing your Best Wishes let me say that if the shoe fits then... and if it you were the troll I was addressing then there is no defense,as a scorpion's instinct is to sting and a skunk's to stink that's what they are that's what they do

You will always recognize my posts because they end with "Personal Best Regards:" One caveat there is a troll on here that avails himself/herself of my closing . Now I don't know if this troll does it because like a shiny object s/he was attracted to it or because s/he believes s/he can fool people into believing it is me. However like all trolls his/her true colors bleed through their words.

My desire would be meaningful and intelligent dialogue but if I have a mind to it I can play the dirty dozen until I get bored.

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

In my humble opinion, you are so way off base on this.

Example...a question was asked why Alinsky was mentioned. This person obviously had never heard of this person. The question was answered as to the why, and that answer was just ignored and off to more "satire".

Alinsky,Ayers, Rev Wright are people who influenced our President,perhaps the MOST influential, thus in any discussion of why he does anything, they are MORE than pertinent, they are imperatives. I am sure that each of them also had positive influences, but those are the men that he has called "mentors" and confidants and ine case of Alinsky,he was an ardent believer.

I do not recall the Blavk Panthers being mentioned much except when they make their presence known or their actions ignored.

No, your words appear dramatic, but they ring VERY HOLLOW, and I encourage you to share examples, especially on the Black Panthers.

Actually, those examples have true merit, and especially HISTORICAL FACT to substantiate their use, and of corse,the can be overdone, but I think those radical things from the past have been handled smoothly.

Not sure why you use them, as most people object mostly to terms like "stupid", "Nazi" (oft used to discuss the previous admin EVEN WHEN THEY ARE NOT THE SUBJECT), "BS", "who cares", etc. etc, and ESPECIALLY, which is pretty much the case, when they are used with NOT EVEN ONE SHRED OF CONCRETE FACT, or a link that allowed you to believe whatever you believe.

If someone disapproves of someone that you like, and they supply the WHY they feel that way, MOST people would come back and present their case to oppose, instead of what you call sarcasm.

You are not required to post a rebuttal, but if you are, take some pride and go a bit beyond the wise cracks

As relates to "the worst of times,grow up. Many thought WW2 was the worst, and many still do. We are living in one of the most difficult times ever. The fears of WW2 seem to dwarf, only because of modern day technology; our world is "smaller", the "bad guys" have much more in the way of weaponary, and what was once our biggest defense....our isolated location...is now being taken away from us, not only with weapons, but with pourous borders, it is difficult.

We have here at home more civil strife, more dissolution of family morals, more aggressive minorities (and do not make that racist or any kind of term usually used..it refers to our media,both social and otherwise)..

It IS a very scary time...EXTREMELY. Saying it is not is simply ignoring facts.

I doubt if any of those who feel they are using satire has even read this far, but if you did, please consider the points. Whomever is President will be blamed for much more than they are responsible for, and receive credit for much more than they actually did....just the way it is.

I, for one, read every single post from those who disagree with my point of view. Unfortunately, there are not many; most are of the "satire" type. "Satire" does not fit well into a discussion forum, and I actually do not believe it was even an attempt at satire.

It comes across as someone who does not care to consider one single thing except for that which they pray to. It comes across as someone, as in high school who when they could not compete, they mocked. And be clear, THIS IS NOT A COMPETITION, BUT IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN EXCHANGE OF IDEAS, NOT WISE CRACKS.

I am sure the same thing can be said of the "other side", but I find, or should say found, that very few attempts are made to sway opinion, only to practice oneupmansship ship with words.

I am making this my last post, which certainly brings joy to many, but the same crap is beginning at the same level as it did before, and by the same people. There makes no sense to try to engage in any serious conversation, and to those who still try to mock me personally with emails back and forth and on Topix, let me make your day. I cede ...you win..have fun.

Saul Alinsky was a man who believed fervently in the underdog and in how to make the classes of people more equal. He also was a very kind man who would give the shirt off his back to a less fortunate being. I admired him.

[Guest]

Saul Alinsky was a man who believed fervently in the underdog and in how to make the classes of people more equal. He also was a very kind man who would give the shirt off his back to a less fortunate being. I admired him.

Uh-huh...just like Obama and Clinton would have you fall for!!!

[Guest]

Saul Alinsky was a man who believed fervently in the underdog and in how to make the classes of people more equal. He also was a very kind man who would give the shirt off his back to a less fortunate being. I admired him.

He wanted everyone to be equal. He had no end game however and really wanted no governing bodies of any kind. He believed that the people could work it out.

Why people fear his process on a national level and everything he wrote was from the perspective of LOCAL, is because inherent in his beliefs is attack and make enemies...that was the crux of most of what he preached. Attack them, make them hate you, etc. THAT is what make people nervous on a national stage and if you restrict your understanding of Alinsky to this forum without doing some reading, it is not easy to understand.

Bottom line...he DID believe in helping the downtrodden...he DID believe in overthrowing the power to be, but never offered any replacement. I have always felt he really was an anarchist.


I suggest everyone read his writings. A very interesting read, but warning to you all, he uses very non political correct language :

"You are white, native-born, and Protestant. Do you like people? You like your family, your friends, some of your business associates (not too many of them), and some of your neighbors. Do you like Catholics, Irish, Italians, Jews, Poles, Mexicans, Negroes, Puerto Ricans, and Chinese? Do you regard them with the warm feeling of fellow human beings or with a cold contempt symbolized in Papists, Micks, Wops, Kikes, Hunkies, Greasers, *******, Spics, and Chinks? If you are one of those people who think of people in these derogatory terms, then you don't like people."

Reveille for Radicals by Saul Alinsky (http://courses.cs.vt.edu/cs3604/support/Assignments/alinsky.html)

I have read his works. I have done a bit of research. I admire his feeling for downtrodden. I detest his feeling that there must be hate involved. I detest his not wanting to work within, but to destroy and he is pretty clear on that stff.

[Guest]

In my humble opinion, you are so way off base on this.

Example...a question was asked why Alinsky was mentioned. This person obviously had never heard of this person. The question was answered as to the why, and that answer was just ignored and off to more "satire".

Alinsky,Ayers, Rev Wright are people who influenced our President,perhaps the MOST influential, thus in any discussion of why he does anything, they are MORE than pertinent, they are imperatives. I am sure that each of them also had positive influences, but those are the men that he has called "mentors" and confidants and ine case of Alinsky,he was an ardent believer.

I do not recall the Blavk Panthers being mentioned much except when they make their presence known or their actions ignored.

No, your words appear dramatic, but they ring VERY HOLLOW, and I encourage you to share examples, especially on the Black Panthers.

Actually, those examples have true merit, and especially HISTORICAL FACT to substantiate their use, and of corse,the can be overdone, but I think those radical things from the past have been handled smoothly.

Not sure why you use them, as most people object mostly to terms like "stupid", "Nazi" (oft used to discuss the previous admin EVEN WHEN THEY ARE NOT THE SUBJECT), "BS", "who cares", etc. etc, and ESPECIALLY, which is pretty much the case, when they are used with NOT EVEN ONE SHRED OF CONCRETE FACT, or a link that allowed you to believe whatever you believe.

If someone disapproves of someone that you like, and they supply the WHY they feel that way, MOST people would come back and present their case to oppose, instead of what you call sarcasm.

You are not required to post a rebuttal, but if you are, take some pride and go a bit beyond the wise cracks

As relates to "the worst of times,grow up. Many thought WW2 was the worst, and many still do. We are living in one of the most difficult times ever. The fears of WW2 seem to dwarf, only because of modern day technology; our world is "smaller", the "bad guys" have much more in the way of weaponary, and what was once our biggest defense....our isolated location...is now being taken away from us, not only with weapons, but with pourous borders, it is difficult.

We have here at home more civil strife, more dissolution of family morals, more aggressive minorities (and do not make that racist or any kind of term usually used..it refers to our media,both social and otherwise)..

It IS a very scary time...EXTREMELY. Saying it is not is simply ignoring facts.

I doubt if any of those who feel they are using satire has even read this far, but if you did, please consider the points. Whomever is President will be blamed for much more than they are responsible for, and receive credit for much more than they actually did....just the way it is.

I, for one, read every single post from those who disagree with my point of view. Unfortunately, there are not many; most are of the "satire" type. "Satire" does not fit well into a discussion forum, and I actually do not believe it was even an attempt at satire.

It comes across as someone who does not care to consider one single thing except for that which they pray to. It comes across as someone, as in high school who when they could not compete, they mocked. And be clear, THIS IS NOT A COMPETITION, BUT IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN EXCHANGE OF IDEAS, NOT WISE CRACKS.

I am sure the same thing can be said of the "other side", but I find, or should say found, that very few attempts are made to sway opinion, only to practice oneupmansship ship with words.

I am making this my last post, which certainly brings joy to many, but the same crap is beginning at the same level as it did before, and by the same people. There makes no sense to try to engage in any serious conversation, and to those who still try to mock me personally with emails back and forth and on Topix, let me make your day. I cede ...you win..have fun.

Just like the Terminator, you'll be back.

[Guest]

He wanted everyone to be equal. He had no end game however and really wanted no governing bodies of any kind. He believed that the people could work it out.

Why people fear his process on a national level and everything he wrote was from the perspective of LOCAL, is because inherent in his beliefs is attack and make enemies...that was the crux of most of what he preached. Attack them, make them hate you, etc. THAT is what make people nervous on a national stage and if you restrict your understanding of Alinsky to this forum without doing some reading, it is not easy to understand.

Bottom line...he DID believe in helping the downtrodden...he DID believe in overthrowing the power to be, but never offered any replacement. I have always felt he really was an anarchist.


I suggest everyone read his writings. A very interesting read, but warning to you all, he uses very non political correct language :

"You are white, native-born, and Protestant. Do you like people? You like your family, your friends, some of your business associates (not too many of them), and some of your neighbors. Do you like Catholics, Irish, Italians, Jews, Poles, Mexicans, Negroes, Puerto Ricans, and Chinese? Do you regard them with the warm feeling of fellow human beings or with a cold contempt symbolized in Papists, Micks, Wops, Kikes, Hunkies, Greasers, *******, Spics, and Chinks? If you are one of those people who think of people in these derogatory terms, then you don't like people."

Reveille for Radicals by Saul Alinsky (http://courses.cs.vt.edu/cs3604/support/Assignments/alinsky.html)

I have read his works. I have done a bit of research. I admire his feeling for downtrodden. I detest his feeling that there must be hate involved. I detest his not wanting to work within, but to destroy and he is pretty clear on that stff.

Thank you for this post. It makes me want to do more reading on my own about Alinsky although I am familiar with him on the surface.

What I can't piece together in my mind is exactly what you state in the last part of your post. How can someone admire a person who, although he may feel for the downtrodden and want to work toward raising them up, supports doing so by way of destruction and hate? That puzzles me to no end and is in total conflict with my upbringing and moral stance. I know that you were not saying you admire him, just his feelings for helping the downtrodden, but the poster to whom you were responding to seems to admire Alinsky and speaks of him as a kind person. I would tend to be very distrustful of someone like that because his actions do not match his words. A kind person walks what he talks and is kind to all. His teachings sound to me that by following them it makes you the judge - who to be kind to and who not to be. Confusing to say the least.

Again, thank you - I will be reading more on my own to try to come to an understanding, but it seems to me to be a "front" of kindness and generosity only to bring about an ulterior motive.

[Guest]

In my humble opinion, you are so way off base on this.

Example...a question was asked why Alinsky was mentioned. This person obviously had never heard of this person. The question was answered as to the why, and that answer was just ignored and off to more "satire".

Alinsky,Ayers, Rev Wright are people who influenced our President,perhaps the MOST influential, thus in any discussion of why he does anything, they are MORE than pertinent, they are imperatives. I am sure that each of them also had positive influences, but those are the men that he has called "mentors" and confidants and ine case of Alinsky,he was an ardent believer.

I do not recall the Blavk Panthers being mentioned much except when they make their presence known or their actions ignored.

No, your words appear dramatic, but they ring VERY HOLLOW, and I encourage you to share examples, especially on the Black Panthers.

Actually, those examples have true merit, and especially HISTORICAL FACT to substantiate their use, and of corse,the can be overdone, but I think those radical things from the past have been handled smoothly.

Not sure why you use them, as most people object mostly to terms like "stupid", "Nazi" (oft used to discuss the previous admin EVEN WHEN THEY ARE NOT THE SUBJECT), "BS", "who cares", etc. etc, and ESPECIALLY, which is pretty much the case, when they are used with NOT EVEN ONE SHRED OF CONCRETE FACT, or a link that allowed you to believe whatever you believe.

If someone disapproves of someone that you like, and they supply the WHY they feel that way, MOST people would come back and present their case to oppose, instead of what you call sarcasm.

You are not required to post a rebuttal, but if you are, take some pride and go a bit beyond the wise cracks

As relates to "the worst of times,grow up. Many thought WW2 was the worst, and many still do. We are living in one of the most difficult times ever. The fears of WW2 seem to dwarf, only because of modern day technology; our world is "smaller", the "bad guys" have much more in the way of weaponary, and what was once our biggest defense....our isolated location...is now being taken away from us, not only with weapons, but with pourous borders, it is difficult.

We have here at home more civil strife, more dissolution of family morals, more aggressive minorities (and do not make that racist or any kind of term usually used..it refers to our media,both social and otherwise)..

It IS a very scary time...EXTREMELY. Saying it is not is simply ignoring facts.

I doubt if any of those who feel they are using satire has even read this far, but if you did, please consider the points. Whomever is President will be blamed for much more than they are responsible for, and receive credit for much more than they actually did....just the way it is.

I, for one, read every single post from those who disagree with my point of view. Unfortunately, there are not many; most are of the "satire" type. "Satire" does not fit well into a discussion forum, and I actually do not believe it was even an attempt at satire.

It comes across as someone who does not care to consider one single thing except for that which they pray to. It comes across as someone, as in high school who when they could not compete, they mocked. And be clear, THIS IS NOT A COMPETITION, BUT IS SUPPOSED TO BE AN EXCHANGE OF IDEAS, NOT WISE CRACKS.

I am sure the same thing can be said of the "other side", but I find, or should say found, that very few attempts are made to sway opinion, only to practice oneupmansship ship with words.

I am making this my last post, which certainly brings joy to many, but the same crap is beginning at the same level as it did before, and by the same people. There makes no sense to try to engage in any serious conversation, and to those who still try to mock me personally with emails back and forth and on Topix, let me make your day. I cede ...you win..have fun.

This is a very good post and I, for one, am sorry to see you go. If you are getting hateful emails I think the administration should block those posters from this forum and maybe TOTV as a whole. That should NOT be allowed! I am continually amazed at the ignorance, immaturity, and rudeness of some of these posters. Thankfully I have met many good, kind, caring people in The Villages over the years, because as someone who has not yet moved there full-time, I would be nervous about making that move if I was basing my decision by what I see on this forum.

Please ADMIN do something about these personal attacks!! By allowing this to go on, it does a great disservice to the community as a whole.

[Guest]

Back to our post ref our Marines the white house didn't even fly the flag at half mast for their lives but did for Nelson Mandela what a disgrace this President is.

[Guest]

Back to our post ref our Marines the white house didn't even fly the flag at half mast for their lives but did for Nelson Mandela what a disgrace this President is.

Did you put YOUR flag at half-staff?

[Guest]

absolutely. Did you?? PS I'm not in charge of the country either

[Guest]

Your silence speaks volumes. And are you really going to try to defend this President who lowered the flag for Nelson Mandela but not the U. S. Military? Absolutely disgraceful. 2+ 2 = 4. Do you get it yet he doesn't love this country and is purposely destroying it?

[Guest]

He wanted everyone to be equal. He had no end game however and really wanted no governing bodies of any kind. He believed that the people could work it out.

Why people fear his process on a national level and everything he wrote was from the perspective of LOCAL, is because inherent in his beliefs is attack and make enemies...that was the crux of most of what he preached. Attack them, make them hate you, etc. THAT is what make people nervous on a national stage and if you restrict your understanding of Alinsky to this forum without doing some reading, it is not easy to understand.

Bottom line...he DID believe in helping the downtrodden...he DID believe in overthrowing the power to be, but never offered any replacement. I have always felt he really was an anarchist.


I suggest everyone read his writings. A very interesting read, but warning to you all, he uses very non political correct language :

"You are white, native-born, and Protestant. Do you like people? You like your family, your friends, some of your business associates (not too many of them), and some of your neighbors. Do you like Catholics, Irish, Italians, Jews, Poles, Mexicans, Negroes, Puerto Ricans, and Chinese? Do you regard them with the warm feeling of fellow human beings or with a cold contempt symbolized in Papists, Micks, Wops, Kikes, Hunkies, Greasers, *******, Spics, and Chinks? If you are one of those people who think of people in these derogatory terms, then you don't like people."

Reveille for Radicals by Saul Alinsky (http://courses.cs.vt.edu/cs3604/support/Assignments/alinsky.html)

I have read his works. I have done a bit of research. I admire his feeling for downtrodden. I detest his feeling that there must be hate involved. I detest his not wanting to work within, but to destroy and he is pretty clear on that stff.

Dear Guest: You begin with he wanted everyone to be equal. But is that the way nature operates? Is it realistic? You then state he wanted no governing bodies. But corporations tried a self-directed work force it failed miserably. And in addition to that nature again steps in because natural leaders rise either by evolution or revolution and followers follow

You then cite the fear of attack national vis a vis local I believe the events in Ferguson and Baltimore speak to those issues. You then address the downtrodden. But before one can discuss this further a definition of the downtrodden is needed. Can it be that 47% of the American population is downtrodden? Was he an anarchist ? I won't label him but his beliefs clsoely align with marxist/communist beliefs. Of course the problem with communists and socialist is that the former always seems to appoint the elite
who dominate by force and for the latter as Thatcher said pretty soon you begin to run out of other people's money.

You then reference the ethnic debate. And my response is people like Alinsky and progressives do more harm then good. Further their introduction into society of political correctness blocked a needed national conversation. And in their own words both Thomas Sowell and Jason Riley state that liberals policies have kept black enslaved. the Asian American communities have sued because universities are manipulating entrance requirements to restrict their numbers in favor of blacks. don't Asian lives count?

finally you ask do you like..........My opinion about any person is based on their personality actions and contribution to this nation. A Thomas Sowell/Jason Riley are held in high esteem while a Al Sharpton offers no positive contribution.


Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

Back to our post ref our Marines the white house didn't even fly the flag at half mast for their lives but did for Nelson Mandela what a disgrace this President is.

Never put that together - a disgrace indeed. Certainly speaks volumes though, doesn't it?

[Guest]

Never put that together - a disgrace indeed. Certainly speaks volumes though, doesn't it?

When things like this don't happen and so many others do makes one question what is the mind set of the hundreds of people advising Obama on a daily basis regarding sensitivites.

And given they do advise him the real proof is in fact what he winds up doing and not doing.

The WH clearly needs an enema!