Obama Bows Again!

[Guest]

What is our president doing? OMG... there is no doubt about it this time... When he "bowed" to the Saudi king in April, it could have been stretched to say that he was just leaning forward to shake the king's hand. But this time... he could not bend over farther unless he was tieing his shoes. He should be showing the world we are the strongest and greatest nation on the earth. Why is he ruining this picture? I feel it is disgusting and embarassing!

http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_emperor_bow/2009/11/15/286508.html?s=al&promo_code=9133-1

[Guest]

Obama bowing is another little trick he is pulling off in his overall plan.

[Guest]

It is interesting to understand what the "bow" means. The one who bows the lowest (e.g. Obama) is the least of the two when it comes to respected/status. A good example is if an 19 year old female were to meet the President of Toyota in Japan she would bow deep about like Obama and the President of Toyota would bow just a little. It is not unusual that when two Japan businessmen meet for them to trade business cards with the description of their positions printied on the back. That gives an indication as to how deep each should bow.
It is a disgrace that our President bowed so deep which indicated that the other person had more respect/status than our President.

[Guest]

He is an uninformed embarrassment.

Yoda

[Guest]

surrounding him and preparing him?

He just does not pull off the image of the number one super power of the world...he is more cow towing now, maybe to reflect the current status of the US image (and falling)!

btk

[Guest]

I'm sorry, but I don't see anything wrong with respecting the people and the culture of the country you're visiting. The one remark I agree with in this article is...

What should we make of this? Is it trivial to worry about what on its face could easily be interpreted as nothing more than a polite gesture by our president to respect the culture of a country?

We've been seen as the bullies of the world for at least the last eight years. We need alliances folks, wake up! If you find this bit of respect embarrassing, I can't imagine where you were living during the last administration!

ahhh.... The meek shall inherit the earth. I believe it! I absolutely believe in respecting other countries and other cultures. :highfive:

[Guest]

I'm sorry, but I don't see anything wrong with respecting the people and the culture of the country you're visiting. The one remark I agree with in this article is...

What should we make of this? Is it trivial to worry about what on its face could easily be interpreted as nothing more than a polite gesture by our president to respect the culture of a country?

We've been seen as the bullies of the world for at least the last eight years. We need alliances folks, wake up! If you find this bit of respect embarrassing, I can't imagine where you were living during the last administration!

ahhh.... The meek shall inherit the earth. I believe it! I absolutely believe in respecting other countries and other cultures. :highfive:
If he visited Israel and other Mid Eastern it would be proper to hug and go cheek to cheek.
some history:
http://www.sphere.com/2009/11/16/the-point-obamas-bow-enrages-critics/36

and for those that need a guide to greetingg;
http://changingminds.org/techniques/body/greeting.htm

[Guest]

I'm sorry, but I don't see anything wrong with respecting the people and the culture of the country you're visiting. The one remark I agree with in this article is...

What should we make of this? Is it trivial to worry about what on its face could easily be interpreted as nothing more than a polite gesture by our president to respect the culture of a country?

We've been seen as the bullies of the world for at least the last eight years. We need alliances folks, wake up! If you find this bit of respect embarrassing, I can't imagine where you were living during the last administration!

ahhh.... The meek shall inherit the earth. I believe it! I absolutely believe in respecting other countries and other cultures. :highfive:

1. If the person who you believe is bullying you bows to you, you just know it is an insult.

2. In the Japanese culture, a bow to the depth of Obamas indicates respect to the point of subservience. No other leader would prostrate himself this way.

3. I see you're back to blaming Bush again.

4. You are not meek enough.

Must you kiss HIS ass at every turn?

Yoda

[Guest]

1. If the person who you believe is bullying you bows to you, you just know it is an insult.

2. In the Japanese culture, a bow to the depth of Obamas indicates respect to the point of subservience. No other leader would prostrate himself this way.

3. I see you're back to blaming Bush again.

4. You are not meek enough.

Must you kiss HIS ass at every turn?

Yoda

1. That's YOUR opinion.

2. Consider the differences in height.

3. I'll never stop. And BTW, the way Bush held hands and smooched with the Saudi King, they may as well got a room!

4. You got that right!

5. An inappropriate remark deserves an inappropriate response.

Better HIS than YOURS! :kiss::laugh:

[Guest]

Yoda, the double standard is what annoys some people - like me.

Bush get PHYSICALLY CUDDLY with a Saudi King (and let's remember, Japan is an ally, Saudi Arabia is where we get oil and terrorists). Nobody says a word except a few radicals who are derided and told "it's nothing".

Obama bows a smidge to the leader of a country who's industries are opening manufacturing plants here and there's supposed to be a big uproar?

What's next? Find footage of him accidentally stepping on a ladybug and then go claiming he's anti-farm and a sellout to the pesticide industry?

[Guest]

It amazing how far people will go to run down the USA. We are NOT BULLIES just tell that to the milliions that Sadam murdered and the ones who were saved by our brave young men, tell it to Europe for the thousands of our young and brave men who died to save the world from the Hitler's, tell it to the thousands of young brave men who where tortured by the Japanese army and were tortures like the Batan forced march where many died, tell it to the the ones who were captured and suffered so notes could be written that Americans are "bullies". Visit a Military cemetary and view the headstones of those who died not as "bullies" but hero's.
I have no patience for those who run down the USA and disrespect the many who died so they could have the freedom to do what those in other corners of the world cannot do. Express freedom.
How can anyone call those young men who gave their lives for our freedom "bullies". It is a true disgrace to their memory.!!
I guess it is the "in" thing to do to run down America. It is not my "in" thing to do and hopefully never will. I am proud to be an American and make no apologies. I hope we never "bow" again to another country and stand proud for who and what we are..

[Guest]

It amazing how far people will go to run down the USA. We are NOT BULLIES just tell that to the milliions that Sadam murdered and the ones who were saved by our brave young men, tell it to Europe for the thousands of our young and brave men who died to save the world from the Hitler's, tell it to the thousands of young brave men who where tortured by the Japanese army and were tortures like the Batan forced march where many died, tell it to the the ones who were captured and suffered so notes could be written that Americans are "bullies". Visit a Military cemetary and view the headstones of those who died not as "bullies" but hero's.
I have no patience for those who run down the USA and disrespect the many who died so they could have the freedom to do what those in other corners of the world cannot do. Express freedom.
How can anyone call those young men who gave their lives for our freedom "bullies". It is a true disgrace to their memory.!!
I guess it is the "in" thing to do to run down America. It is not my "in" thing to do and hopefully never will. I am proud to be an American and make no apologies. I hope we never "bow" again to another country and stand proud for who and what we are..

Well said and I agree 100%

[Guest]

It amazing how far people will go to run down the USA. We are NOT BULLIES just tell that to the milliions that Sadam murdered and the ones who were saved by our brave young men, tell it to Europe for the thousands of our young and brave men who died to save the world from the Hitler's, tell it to the thousands of young brave men who where tortured by the Japanese army and were tortures like the Batan forced march where many died, tell it to the the ones who were captured and suffered so notes could be written that Americans are "bullies". Visit a Military cemetary and view the headstones of those who died not as "bullies" but hero's.
I have no patience for those who run down the USA and disrespect the many who died so they could have the freedom to do what those in other corners of the world cannot do. Express freedom.
How can anyone call those young men who gave their lives for our freedom "bullies". It is a true disgrace to their memory.!!
I guess it is the "in" thing to do to run down America. It is not my "in" thing to do and hopefully never will. I am proud to be an American and make no apologies. I hope we never "bow" again to another country and stand proud for who and what we are..

I, personally, NEVER SAID that our young soldiers were the bullies. They just follow orders. Yes, indeed, they are hero's.

It's the general attitude of past administrations (not only Republican's, but most) and the extreme right, always calling for "let's attack" that I call bullies.

I am also proud to be an American, but I don't wear blinders. We strive for perfection, but we are not perfect. I, also, make no apologies for saying... We can be better and do better to heal the alliances so damaged by the previous administration. We had become a joke, and a bad joke at that.

I, personally, am proud that we FINALLY have a President that can string two sentences together, and bring hope, not just to us, but to the world in general. President Obama fully understands that we are not ALONE in the world. And without new and stronger alliances, we will surely go the way of other "fallen empires" that also thought they were the only game in town.

And I'll thank you to not twist my words in the future. :boxing2:

[Guest]

It amazing how far people will go to run down the USA. We are NOT BULLIES just tell that to the milliions that Sadam murdered and the ones who were saved by our brave young men, tell it to Europe for the thousands of our young and brave men who died to save the world from the Hitler's, tell it to the thousands of young brave men who where tortured by the Japanese army and were tortures like the Batan forced march where many died, tell it to the the ones who were captured and suffered so notes could be written that Americans are "bullies". Visit a Military cemetary and view the headstones of those who died not as "bullies" but hero's.
I have no patience for those who run down the USA and disrespect the many who died so they could have the freedom to do what those in other corners of the world cannot do. Express freedom.
How can anyone call those young men who gave their lives for our freedom "bullies". It is a true disgrace to their memory.!!
I guess it is the "in" thing to do to run down America. It is not my "in" thing to do and hopefully never will. I am proud to be an American and make no apologies. I hope we never "bow" again to another country and stand proud for who and what we are..

Very good post. I am sick of OBAMA kissing everyone's butt and asking for an apology. Yea he can string two sentences together if the teleprompter is working. LOL This guy is a fool.:agree::agree:

[Guest]

Why should this administration alienate the ones who have been our allies just to appease our enemies?

[Guest]

Let me not "twist" your words so I will respond directly to them:

Quote:I, personally, NEVER SAID that our young soldiers were the bullies. They just follow orders. Yes, indeed, they are hero's.

So they died for no cause other than some orders from a "bully". What a shame you would say this about the ones who put their lives down for freedom for the Iraq people, stopped the proliferation of Sadam's attempt to take over the oil fieds in the mid east while killing millions of his people. Died on the battle fronts of France, Germany, Italy, et. They died as hero's protecting humanity and at the orders of the Commander in Chief of the USA. I am proud of them and the President(s).

Quote:We had become a joke, and a bad joke at that.

Your right. Any country who sends their young men over to free people and they die securing others freedom and then the same country has some of its citizens apologizing is a "joke". And what a bad joke on our country. It would be better to be proud of who we are and then we will not be a "joke" I don't see Germany appoligizing for the death camps, or Japan for attacking on December 7th or Saudia Arabia for the men from their country flying into the World Trade Towers.

Quote:I, personally, am proud that we FINALLY have a President that can string two sentences together, and bring hope, not just to us, but to the world in general. President Obama fully understands that we are not ALONE in the world. And without new and stronger alliances, we will surely go the way of other "fallen empires" that also thought they were the only game in town.

The sad part of this is there is a lack of understanding of pre WWII and history. Yes, there are fallen empires, such as Germany after WWII, Japan after WWII, Iraq dictator after the Iraq war. I can't believe there is a comparison being made to these criminal empires. To the death camps of Germany, to the tortures to our hero's in Japan, to the gasing by Sadam in Iraq and the rest of the criminal empires. Does anyone think America is going the way of these horrible people. In every case we stood up for humanity and fought for their freedoms. Please don't refer to Obama in the same paragraph as these hero's. He never served, never put his life on the line for freedom.

And I'll thank you to not twist my words in the future.

I don't think I twisted your words but rather responded to your positions.

[Guest]

Let me not "twist" your words so I will respond directly to them:

Quote:I, personally, NEVER SAID that our young soldiers were the bullies. They just follow orders. Yes, indeed, they are hero's.

So they died for no cause other than some orders from a "bully". What a shame you would say this about the ones who put their lives down for freedom for the Iraq people, stopped the proliferation of Sadam's attempt to take over the oil fieds in the mid east while killing millions of his people. Died on the battle fronts of France, Germany, Italy, et. They died as hero's protecting humanity and at the orders of the Commander in Chief of the USA. I am proud of them and the President(s).

Quote:We had become a joke, and a bad joke at that.

Your right. Any country who sends their young men over to free people and they die securing others freedom and then the same country has some of its citizens apologizing is a "joke". And what a bad joke on our country. It would be better to be proud of who we are and then we will not be a "joke" I don't see Germany appoligizing for the death camps, or Japan for attacking on December 7th or Saudia Arabia for the men from their country flying into the World Trade Towers.

Quote:I, personally, am proud that we FINALLY have a President that can string two sentences together, and bring hope, not just to us, but to the world in general. President Obama fully understands that we are not ALONE in the world. And without new and stronger alliances, we will surely go the way of other "fallen empires" that also thought they were the only game in town.

The sad part of this is there is a lack of understanding of pre WWII and history. Yes, there are fallen empires, such as Germany after WWII, Japan after WWII, Iraq dictator after the Iraq war. I can't believe there is a comparison being made to these criminal empires. To the death camps of Germany, to the tortures to our hero's in Japan, to the gasing by Sadam in Iraq and the rest of the criminal empires. Does anyone think America is going the way of these horrible people. In every case we stood up for humanity and fought for their freedoms. Please don't refer to Obama in the same paragraph as these hero's. He never served, never put his life on the line for freedom.

And I'll thank you to not twist my words in the future.

I don't think I twisted your words but rather responded to your positions.



Don't see any word twisting in this post, just the facts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Guest]

Let me not "twist" your words so I will respond directly to them:

Quote:I, personally, NEVER SAID that our young soldiers were the bullies. They just follow orders. Yes, indeed, they are hero's.

So they died for no cause other than some orders from a "bully". What a shame you would say this about the ones who put their lives down for freedom for the Iraq people, stopped the proliferation of Sadam's attempt to take over the oil fieds in the mid east while killing millions of his people. Died on the battle fronts of France, Germany, Italy, et. They died as hero's protecting humanity and at the orders of the Commander in Chief of the USA. I am proud of them and the President(s).

Quote:We had become a joke, and a bad joke at that.

Your right. Any country who sends their young men over to free people and they die securing others freedom and then the same country has some of its citizens apologizing is a "joke". And what a bad joke on our country. It would be better to be proud of who we are and then we will not be a "joke" I don't see Germany appoligizing for the death camps, or Japan for attacking on December 7th or Saudia Arabia for the men from their country flying into the World Trade Towers.

Quote:I, personally, am proud that we FINALLY have a President that can string two sentences together, and bring hope, not just to us, but to the world in general. President Obama fully understands that we are not ALONE in the world. And without new and stronger alliances, we will surely go the way of other "fallen empires" that also thought they were the only game in town.

The sad part of this is there is a lack of understanding of pre WWII and history. Yes, there are fallen empires, such as Germany after WWII, Japan after WWII, Iraq dictator after the Iraq war. I can't believe there is a comparison being made to these criminal empires. To the death camps of Germany, to the tortures to our hero's in Japan, to the gasing by Sadam in Iraq and the rest of the criminal empires. Does anyone think America is going the way of these horrible people. In every case we stood up for humanity and fought for their freedoms. Please don't refer to Obama in the same paragraph as these hero's. He never served, never put his life on the line for freedom.

And I'll thank you to not twist my words in the future.

I don't think I twisted your words but rather responded to your positions.

Wow, somebody found the red crayon! Are you under the impression that I haven't had relatives and loved ones die in wars defending our country. For the last time, our soldiers are hero's following orders. We should have no more invaded Iraq than Kansas! Good Lord! Can't you even see that???
Again, don't put words in my mouth about the soldiers. That's an old, old right wing trick.

My position is to respect other countries and other cultures. That is what our President is doing. All this petty crap about bowing is a waste of time and energy. We need alliances. Don't you get that? I suppose President Obama shouldn't have gone to China either? Guess what! They own us. They're our backers! Get a grip on reality and learn to be a little humble. We're not in the best position in the world, no matter how pretty a picture you like to paint.

I love this country as much as you do... make no mistake about that! But, if you want to sit by and fiddle while Rome burns, that's you're prerogative. And whether you like it or not, President Obama is the Commander in Chief. Clearly, you're a member of the party of NO. Good luck with that.

I'll match my familes contributions to this country up against yours anytime.

[Guest]

I, personally, NEVER SAID that our young soldiers were the bullies. They just follow orders. Yes, indeed, they are hero's.

It's the general attitude of past administrations (not only Republican's, but most) and the extreme right, always calling for "let's attack" that I call bullies.

I am also proud to be an American, but I don't wear blinders. We strive for perfection, but we are not perfect. I, also, make no apologies for saying... We can be better and do better to heal the alliances so damaged by the previous administration. We had become a joke, and a bad joke at that.

I, personally, am proud that we FINALLY have a President that can string two sentences together, and bring hope, not just to us, but to the world in general. President Obama fully understands that we are not ALONE in the world. And without new and stronger alliances, we will surely go the way of other "fallen empires" that also thought they were the only game in town.

And I'll thank you to not twist my words in the future. :boxing2:


This is not the kind of thread I usually post in because frankly I dont care how he bows to anyone...I just want him to be OUR President !

However, you always refer to what you refer to as the "extreme right" and usually follow that with an "extreme left" talking point. Just thought I would point that out to you.

Secondly, while I have reserved judgement on this president relative to foreigh affairs, I will tell you this....The President is the President of the USA, not the world...even though he thinks he is. His JOB is to protect this country, noone else....he should be proud and say he is proud. If you actually read about the past President and what he did, you will find that he did much to enforce our resolve to the world...did he maybe at times go too far...probably....does this President go to far the other way...yes.

I think you should brush up on what makes a president....it is not based on stringing two sentences together, although this president was basically elected on that premise.

As I said, I am pending judgement on foreign affairs with this president but had to respond as you sound like a soundbite from MOVEON !

[Guest]

You can't have it both ways. You are either proud of our country or you are not.
If you bow to a foreign power and say you are ashamed of your country then that is who you are.
If you put other lives ahead of the ones you were elected to protect then that is who you are.
If you visit other countries and appologize for our country then that is who you are.
If you put people in the administration who violate or ignore the Constitution then that is who you are.
If you come from one of the most political corrupt area of the USA then that is who you are.
If you lie and promise actions which you cannot deliver then that is who you are.
If these lead to being something other than a leader of the United States of American then that is who you are.
Too many want it both ways today. It does not work. Your actions speak for who you are not worthless words.
As they say you have to walk the walk and not just talk the talk.

[Guest]

You can't have it both ways. You are either proud of our country or you are not. Nothing is that black and white. Do you have children? Are you proud of them or not? When they did something wrong, did that make you love them less?
If you bow to a foreign power and say you are ashamed of your country then that is who you are. I'm sorry, did he whisper "I apologize for America while bowing??? Wow, and Fox News missed this? Hahahah! :laugh:
If you put other lives ahead of the ones you were elected to protect then that is who you are. And President Obama is doing this how???
If you visit other countries and appologize for our country then that is who you are. We are not perfect. No person or country is! Reality check!
If you put people in the administration who violate or ignore the Constitution then that is who you are. President Obama taught Constitutional Law. Bet he knows a lot more about it than you do.
If you come from one of the most political corrupt area of the USA then that is who you are. Are you referring to Chicago??? Because I'm from Chicago. Do you think every human being in Chicago is corrupt? That's just plain moronic! And where are you from? Bet we can dig up lots of corruption.
If you lie and promise actions which you cannot deliver then that is who you are. Oh, you mean like starting a war over WMD's that do not exist?
If these lead to being something other than a leader of the United States of American then that is who you are. This doesn't even make sense.
Too many want it both ways today. It does not work. Your actions speak for who you are not worthless words. Never underestimate the power of a kind word or gesture.
As they say you have to walk the walk and not just talk the talk.

Are we through walking and talking yet??? :icon_bored:

[Guest]

So they died for no cause other than some orders from a "bully". What a shame you would say this about the ones who put their lives down for freedom for the Iraq people, stopped the proliferation of Sadam's attempt to take over the oil fieds in the mid east while killing millions of his people. Died on the battle fronts of France, Germany, Italy, et. They died as hero's protecting humanity and at the orders of the Commander in Chief of the USA. I am proud of them and the President(s).


I would put it differently. Our soldiers died in Iraq because of the deliberate lies told by the Commander In Chief. Our soldiers are dying in Afghanistan because of the previous administration's concentration on Iraw and our current administrations hand-wrangling about which way to go, policywise.

I remember how Iraq started. This wasn't about freedom for the Iraqi people. If it was, we would have attacked Saudi Arabia for treating their women like chattel. We would be attacking North Korea because, well, they actually DO have nukes. It was all about WMD programs, yellowcake, etc. That's how it was sold to the American People. On top of that, as many as 60% of the population believed that Saddam has something to do with 9/11. That little tidbit has been proven false again and again.

When we were running up to invasion, I was in a group discussing this and my personal reservation was that we had never before been a "first strike country". I was nervous about what kind of precedent this would set. BUT - given all the word having come out about nukes and chemical weapons, and the fact that Saddam DID use them on his own people (so it wasn't a stretch to say he would use them on others) kept me from openly opposing the war.

Privately, behind closed doors, it seems the administration was hell-bent on pinning 9/11 on Saddam so we could have justification for invasion. Why? Who really knows? I've heard everything from the President wanting revenge on Iraq's leaders for the assasination attempt to a theory that it was something to demonstrate American military might against a country where we already had assets on the ground (making it a much easier logistical target - like when Noriega declared 'maximum war' on the us with a pair of military bases right there in Panama).

When our soliders died in Europe or in the Pacific Theater or Korea, those were in response to attacks. Even the war in kuwait was in response to naked aggression. Afghanistan harbored the people who attacked us on 9/11. All clear justification for war. I remember the ultimatum that Bush delivered saying, basically, "hand over Bin Laden or else". My "tree hugging" friends didn't think Bush would even SAY those words but I was sure he would, and he did. We all know what happened next.

The "technical" justification for invading Iraq? Saddam wasn't allowing inspectors into research facilities in a timely manner, perpetually playing a game of cat-and-mouse with them. Now we know that he was bluffing but we weren't so sure then. Except I wonder about the administration officials (but not Bush himself) who said we'd find the goods within a week because they had intelligence on exactly where the chemical and nuclear materials were.

This is far different from the defense missions in the past.

My mom was a Marine. My father was in the Navy. I work on an Air Force base. My brother was in the Navy. My fiancee has one son in the Army (back from Iraq) and one son who just left the Navy. My other brother discovered he had a hole in his heart during his physical when he enlisted in the Air Force.

Go ahead. TELL me I'm disrespecting them because I disagree with the Commander In Chief misusing the nobility that is our armed forces. TELL me I'm disrespecting them because I disagree with sending National Guard troops overseas.

When they enlisted, they signed a check to the U. S. Government that can be cashed at any time requiring them to give up their lives.

If you can't see the difference between the respect I have for the soldiers and the disrespect I have for the way they were utilitzed, then I truly do feel sorry for you.

[Guest]

I guess George Washington attacking the British as a "frist strike" was wrong. I guess saving millions from the killing and torture of Sadam was a mistake. I see America as a country who is concerned with others, an America that is good and I am proud of the last President who did not stand by and try to evaluate everything on a political basis but defended us against any further attacks since 911. It seems to be popular to attack him while enjoying the safety he provided to all Americans.

[Guest]

I would put it differently. Our soldiers died in Iraq because of the deliberate lies told by the Commander In Chief. Our soldiers are dying in Afghanistan because of the previous administration's concentration on Iraw and our current administrations hand-wrangling about which way to go, policywise.

I remember how Iraq started. This wasn't about freedom for the Iraqi people. If it was, we would have attacked Saudi Arabia for treating their women like chattel. We would be attacking North Korea because, well, they actually DO have nukes. It was all about WMD programs, yellowcake, etc. That's how it was sold to the American People. On top of that, as many as 60% of the population believed that Saddam has something to do with 9/11. That little tidbit has been proven false again and again.

When we were running up to invasion, I was in a group discussing this and my personal reservation was that we had never before been a "first strike country". I was nervous about what kind of precedent this would set. BUT - given all the word having come out about nukes and chemical weapons, and the fact that Saddam DID use them on his own people (so it wasn't a stretch to say he would use them on others) kept me from openly opposing the war.

Privately, behind closed doors, it seems the administration was hell-bent on pinning 9/11 on Saddam so we could have justification for invasion. Why? Who really knows? I've heard everything from the President wanting revenge on Iraq's leaders for the assasination attempt to a theory that it was something to demonstrate American military might against a country where we already had assets on the ground (making it a much easier logistical target - like when Noriega declared 'maximum war' on the us with a pair of military bases right there in Panama).

When our soliders died in Europe or in the Pacific Theater or Korea, those were in response to attacks. Even the war in kuwait was in response to naked aggression. Afghanistan harbored the people who attacked us on 9/11. All clear justification for war. I remember the ultimatum that Bush delivered saying, basically, "hand over Bin Laden or else". My "tree hugging" friends didn't think Bush would even SAY those words but I was sure he would, and he did. We all know what happened next.

The "technical" justification for invading Iraq? Saddam wasn't allowing inspectors into research facilities in a timely manner, perpetually playing a game of cat-and-mouse with them. Now we know that he was bluffing but we weren't so sure then. Except I wonder about the administration officials (but not Bush himself) who said we'd find the goods within a week because they had intelligence on exactly where the chemical and nuclear materials were.

This is far different from the defense missions in the past.

My mom was a Marine. My father was in the Navy. I work on an Air Force base. My brother was in the Navy. My fiancee has one son in the Army (back from Iraq) and one son who just left the Navy. My other brother discovered he had a hole in his heart during his physical when he enlisted in the Air Force.

Go ahead. TELL me I'm disrespecting them because I disagree with the Commander In Chief misusing the nobility that is our armed forces. TELL me I'm disrespecting them because I disagree with sending National Guard troops overseas.

When they enlisted, they signed a check to the U. S. Government that can be cashed at any time requiring them to give up their lives.

If you can't see the difference between the respect I have for the soldiers and the disrespect I have for the way they were utilitzed, then I truly do feel sorry for you.

Well said! :clap2: And thank you to your family for all they have contributed to this country.

[Guest]

I also have had many family members served and protected the United States some of which..2 brothers and a father 1941-1945. WWII Prisioner of War who was shot down and taken prisioner of war (as an aside he flew off of the same aircraft carrier that our former President Bush flew off of and was shot down), Vietnam and both Iraq (F16 pilot) 2 time deployed Afganstan (Stealth bomber pilot) and Kosov (Stealth Bomber Pilot), Base Commander Special Ops and a neice who was in the Army and is buried in a Military cemetary and was 28 years old when she died..BUT it is not about us nor should it be. I respect and honor any and all who have served our country. In WWII I attended the burial services where 12-14 hero's were buried at the same time at the Arlington National Cemetary.
I with emphasis on "I" am proud to be an American and of my last President.
I have been to the pesudo intellectual cocktail parties in California where it is popular to pretend they are smarter than all the advise provided to our President, could make better decisions without facts, and like to believe they have a higher moral ground and love for humanity than the unfortunate person and President(s) who must make the decisions and live with them.
He was there for the Americans when 9/11 happened, he promised he would take all actions to protect us from further strikes and he has. We should honor him and thank him for his strength to set aside the naysayers and
although continually attacked and accused of all sorts of terrible things held the course and protected us against any further terrorist attacks. Lets hope the one that followed him can do the same thing.

[Guest]

I guess George Washington attacking the British as a "frist strike" was wrong.
...
I am proud of the last President who did not stand by and try to evaluate everything on a political basis but defended us against any further attacks since 911. It seems to be popular to attack him while enjoying the safety he provided to all Americans.

1) What Revolutionary War did YOU study? The first shots were fired a few miles from where I'm sitting right now (I work at Hanscom AFB which abuts Minuteman National Park in Lexington MA). War came from the British regulars marching from Boston to confiscate arms suspected to be stored in Lexington and Concord. Washington had NOTHING to do with this.

2) I don't mean this to sound snarky, and I share your pride in Bush attacking Afghanistan (my position was always that, if Gore had won the election, he would have lobbed a few cruise missiles at some camps and declare the problem 'dealth with' - that was Bill Clinton's M.O. in many cases) - but are you proud of the trampling of the Constitution that was The U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act? Mind you I agree with allowing law enforcement agencies to share intelligence - that was good - but warrantless wiretaps and holding people arrested ON AMERICAN SOIL without due process? (Among other things)

[Guest]

1) What Revolutionary War did YOU study? The first shots were fired a few miles from where I'm sitting right now (I work at Hanscom AFB which abuts Minuteman National Park in Lexington MA). War came from the British regulars marching from Boston to confiscate arms suspected to be stored in Lexington and Concord. Washington had NOTHING to do with this.

I guess we could argue who started the war. You are correct that on April 18,1775 General Gage, (British Army) marched to Lexington to seize the munitions stored by the Colonial militia at Concord. This may have been considered an "act of war" but who fired the first shot was the start of the war. However, and this is where there may be a discussion. On the morning of April 19, 1775 77 minutemen gathered on the village (not one in florida) green. Shot were then fired and the question is "who fired the first shots"? That would determine who technically started the war? It is an open question? Logic would say it was the minutemen protecting their munitions.
Regarding Washington's role. He did arrive in Boston on July 1775 to take over the colonial forces. I guess you could technically say he did not start the war but rather it began his participation after the village green conflict?

I totally disagree with any attempt to disregard the constitution and unfortunately I believe the current President has done this much more than the previous one. I believe the difference is noticable that the previous one did it to protect the citizens while the current one does it for political purposes. Does that make one better than the other? No if it violates our constitution. BUT any one of the terrorist's found on our soil are not/should not be protected by the Constitution since they are not part of an army and not part of a soverign nation and not a citizen of the US.

[Guest]

PennBF: Thanks for keeping it civil. Again, an honest question here. What violations of the Constitution are you referring to? You said the current violations were worse because they were politically motivated as opposed to what I was pointing out which were, paraphrasing you, security motivated.

Now I don't mean this in an accusatory way so forgive me if it sounds like this. But the reason that I ask about which Constitutional rights you're talking about is that I suspect it has to do with increasing Government agencies and taxing you/us to pay for them.

*IF* that is the case, then I disagree with you. Arguing over a little money and a few more beaureaucrats is *nothing* compared to our basic human rights. In all the years of "feature creep" I've seen in the U.S. government, I've never seen so many rights steamrolled in one fell swoop as with the Patriot Act. Think about it - warrantlass wiretaps. No-warrant arrests bypassing the special courts that were set up *specifically* to deal with time-sensitive cases (i.e. you didn't have time to get a warrant because of the danger involved - special court was designed to allow this so long as you 'got your paperwork' shortly thereafter). Gag orders on subpoenas (librarian can't even say they were served with one of these 'secret subpoenas'). Those are *police state* tactics. All in the name of "security". Heck a whole new HUGE Department of Homeland Security that now makes you take your shoes off at the airport! (Aren't you glad Richard Reid didn't stuff his bogus bomb in his pants!)

If I have misrepresented you, let me know. This is where I *feel* you're coming from and, if I'm wrong, I want to know where.

Abraham Lincoln suspended habeus corpus during the Civil War but it was reinstated. This was repeated in an abhorrent manner when Japanese Americans were interned in concentration camps during WWII. That is generally viewed as the worst human rights abuse in American history except for the treatment of Native American tribes. At least those incidents had an end-point (even Native Americans are winning in courts of law).

...and not that I think the government's "feature creep" is good. I just don't feel it's as bad as the above-mentioned examples. I'm reminded of Franklin's "those who trade liberty for security will neither deserve nor receive either".

[Guest]

djplong, You asked "What violations of the Constitution are you referring to? You said the current violations were worse because they were politically motivated."
In order to be responsive here is a partial list and not meant to represent all of his violations of our Constitution:
1. Moved to take the Census from Sec. of Commerce to Ram-bo Emanuel so he (Obama) could control voting numbers. This is right out of and smacks of Acorn.
(Article 1, Section 2 of Constitution)
2. Accepted/appointed himself Chariman of UN Security Council. (Sec 9). This is a clear violation of our Constitution. The President cannot accept this Chairmanship and also be President of US.
3. Article 1, Sec.9 restricts what he did in appointing Hillary Clinton to Sec. of State and providing pay increase.
4. Limiting compensation to Co's that accepted TARP. This power is not allowed per the Constitution.
5. Economic Stimulus package was another clear violation of the Constitution
6. Accepting Nobel Peace prize without Congress approval was a violation, (Sec 9).
These are just a few of the violations. None of these relate to protecting the Americans from a foreign power but rather are political in nature and to raise the office from what it was meant to be by our founders to a socialist profile.
This list is just a sample as there are many more that trash our Constitution in favor of a form of Socialism. As a very wise man said..If you want to see what socialism looks like visit the housing projects in the various large cities.

[Guest]

djplong, You asked "What violations of the Constitution are you referring to? You said the current violations were worse because they were politically motivated."
In order to be responsive here is a partial list and not meant to represent all of his violations of our Constitution:
1. Moved to take the Census from Sec. of Commerce to Ram-bo Emanuel so he (Obama) could control voting numbers. This is right out of and smacks of Acorn.
(Article 1, Section 2 of Constitution)
2. Accepted/appointed himself Chariman of UN Security Council. (Sec 9). This is a clear violation of our Constitution. The President cannot accept this Chairmanship and also be President of US.
3. Article 1, Sec.9 restricts what he did in appointing Hillary Clinton to Sec. of State and providing pay increase.
4. Limiting compensation to Co's that accepted TARP. This power is not allowed per the Constitution.
5. Economic Stimulus package was another clear violation of the Constitution
6. Accepting Nobel Peace prize without Congress approval was a violation, (Sec 9).
These are just a few of the violations. None of these relate to protecting the Americans from a foreign power but rather are political in nature and to raise the office from what it was meant to be by our founders to a socialist profile.
This list is just a sample as there are many more that trash our Constitution in favor of a form of Socialism. As a very wise man said..If you want to see what socialism looks like visit the housing projects in the various large cities.

HE'S BACK!!! Keedy is that you?

[Guest]

HE'S BACK!!! Keedy is that you?

Don't think so. Writing styles not even close.

[Guest]

Don't think so. Writing styles not even close.

You are probably correct. The style is all wrong, but the logic is the same. Keedy would often edit his work immediately after it was posted. A bit of a perfectionist I'd say.

[Guest]

You are probably correct. The style is all wrong, but the logic is the same. Keedy would often edit his work immediately after it was posted. A bit of a perfectionist I'd say.

I see nothing wrong with the logic.

[Guest]

I see nothing wrong with the logic.

I was simply comparing it to Keedy's. You know, facts be damned, full speed ahead. Operating on emotions and the pack of falsehoods put out there by the fringe elements (NOT all) of the loyal opposition.

[Guest]

Don't know who Keedy is but would probably like his posts??

[Guest]

Don't know who Keedy is but would probably like his posts??

Neither does anyone else! Vaporized! :wave: Had a short run and then - Outta here!! Puff - Smoke - gone!

[Guest]

Don't know who Keedy is but would probably like his posts??

Keedy was one of those who left TOTV because of real or imagined censorship.

Yoda

[Guest]

I'll take these in order. You took the time to post them, the least I can do is respond.

1 [about the Census] - Care to elaborate? I hadn't heard of this and I don't know what you mean by taking it from Commerce to Emanuel. Checking the Constitution, that article says WHEN it's supposed to be done. Not who is supposed to do it, other than the government.

2 [UN Sec Council chairmanship]. Well, it's not a title of nobility. However, the Constitution (Art I, Sec 9, as you said) DOES clearly state he can't take money from them without Congressional approval. So that begs the question - did he get paid? If so, this would appear to have some traction. On the other hand, the Constitution clearly states that he (the President) can't accept pay or "Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State". The U.N. isn't a foreign state.

3 [Appointing Clinton] Art I, Sec 9 doesn't say anything about appointing someone to office.

4 [Limiting compensation to TARP recipient] Why isn't this allowed? We put restrictions on people who receive federal money all the time. You can't spend food stamps on cigarettes, as a blue-collar example. In fact, the biggest uproar is that we didn't put ENOUGH strings on the TARP money.

5 [Economic Stimulus vipolated the Constitution] How so? It was a spending bill passed by both houses and signed by the President.

6 [Accepting the Nobel Peace Prize] Again you referenced Art I, Sec 9. I don't see the violation here. The money comes from a Foundation, not a foreign power. In addition, he's donating it to charity. It's not a title of nobility so it fails that test too.


If you want to see what socialism looks like visit the housing projects in the various large cities.


Next year, for my honeymoon, my fiancee and I will be going to France, the UK and Ireland. This will be my first trip overseas after 20 years of wrangling to get a passport. But I *have* been to Canada - a country FAR more socialistic than we are - and I've been there over 2 dozen times since the 1980s for trips lasting anywhere from 12 hours to a week (it helps that it's less than a 4 hour drive from my home to Montreal).

There's no drab Soviet-style malaise hovering over that country. In fact, one could easily argue that downtown Montreal has a LOT more life in it than downtown Boston (an hour's drive from my house). Never mind the fact that it has far less crime even though it's a larger city.

When you say 'socialism' you think gray concrete blocks of subsistence housing. But that is what you get in "totalitarianism". I've seen much of eastern Canada from Toronto to Nova Scotia and it's quite nice. Sure, the taxes are higher, I won't argue that - but I've also had experience with the Canadian medical system in Montreal when a chronic ocndition of mine flared up. What would have cost between $2500-$5000 here cost less than $600 up there and I got excellent care.

In France, they're not a slave to Big Oil, they have a better electrical grid (we'll need one too) and the trains run on-time and 3x faster than they run here. Oh - and they ALSO have a health care system ranked best in the world that COMBINES a public option with private health insurance companies.

We can LEARN from these examples. Take what WORKS and fix what DOESN'T.

I'm surprised there's not more outrage over the fact that we paid for Europe's defense during the Cold War (and still do today via NATO) and they didn't have the defense budgets we had. They were able to invest in their infrastructure while we protected them. IMO, it's time for us to pull back SOME of that umbrella so we can 'play catch up' with our own infrastructure. The fact that our only high-speed train goes barely more than half the speed of trains in Europe and Japan and we have one line from Boston to Washington while they have networks ocvering their entire respective countries.

[Guest]

Keedy was one of those who left TOTV because of real or imagined censorship.

Yoda

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh REALLY! Don't bet on it.

[Guest]

djplong
"1 [about the Census] - Care to elaborate? I hadn't heard of this and I don't know what you mean by taking it from Commerce to Emanuel. Checking the Constitution, that article says WHEN it's supposed to be done. Not who is supposed to do it, other than the government."

I dont know whether a violation of the constitution but certainly one of the early red flags to the political leaning of this administration was the early announcement that the census taking would report to and be administered from Emanuel's office.

From HUFFINGTON POST..."I'm not convinced Washington has awakened to the reality yet -- but the 2010 Census is going to shake things up politically in this country, and politicians would do themselves a favor to wake up and smell the coffee in advance.

This is about raw political power -- something politicians of all stripes understand."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/frank-sharry/latinos-poised-to-shake-u_b_362652.html

This article was about the effect of immigration reform on the census.

This is an article from a few months ago from CBS...."However, the spokesman says that "White House senior management will work closely with the Census Director, given the number of decisions that will need to reach the president's desk."

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/02/12/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry4797600.shtml

This was after the Republicans raised $%^^ publicly when it was found that Emanuel wanted to control it from the WH. They may have tempered or pulled back a bit, but imagine a WH having ANY control over the census. Not sure where this stands at present !

[Guest]

I'll take these in order. You took the time to post them, the least I can do is respond.

1>>The Commerce Dept. was assigned the responsibility to avoid "gerrymanding" which Obama has now set up on the same basis as the Acorn criminal actions.

2>>The operative word being "Office". The UN is in fact an association of "foreign states".

3 >>See above

4 >> Show me in the constitution where Congress or the Executive branch have the right to limit compensation to private companies. They have no rights and in fact the constitution was built to prevent interruption or involvement in free commerce.

5 >>See above

6 >>He can't accept without Congress approval. This is not open to quesiton as the Constitution is clear. As an aside, it prevents other Nations/Powers from "buying" our government/obligations. Our founders were pretty darn smart.


Quote:
If you want to see what socialism looks like visit the housing projects in the various large cities.

Next year, for my honeymoon, my fiancee and I will be going to France, the UK and Ireland. This will be my first trip overseas after 20 years of wrangling to get a passport. But I *have* been to Canada - a country FAR more socialistic than we are - and I've been there over 2 dozen times since the 1980s for trips lasting anywhere from 12 hours to a week (it helps that it's less than a 4 hour drive from my home to Montreal).
>> I wish you guys a happy and great trip. As an aside..I have had people working for me in Paris and traveled there on a regular basis, spent many a months in England on business. I spent some serious time Toronto on business, had friends there and you should ask your friends,(a) what taxes do they pay and (b) how long to they wait at times for procedures.
There's no drab Soviet-style malaise hovering over that country. In fact, one could easily argue that downtown Montreal has a LOT more life in it than downtown Boston (an hour's drive from my house). Never mind the fact that it has far less crime even though it's a larger city.
>>I don't understand your point as I refered to "housing projects" and you are referring to Montreal. Which economy would you rather live under, Canada or USA. Understand they are living with a great sense of entitlements from the government and pay pretty high taxes.
When you say 'socialism' you think gray concrete blocks of subsistence housing. But that is what you get in "totalitarianism". I've seen much of eastern Canada from Toronto to Nova Scotia and it's quite nice. Sure, the taxes are higher, I won't argue that - but I've also had experience with the Canadian medical system in Montreal when a chronic ocndition of mine flared up. What would have cost between $2500-$5000 here cost less than $600 up there and I got excellent care.l
>>We can agree that you refer to taxes being high? Regarding chronic problem. As a citizen it is not unusual to wait a long time for a procedure. One time does not meet the standards for historical experiences
This is also very true to the UK and for information I recommend you buy the English paper, "Daily Mail" on a regular basis or read it through the Drudge Report on the internet. It will provide the facts regarding their medical care and taxes.
In France, they're not a slave to Big Oil, they have a better electrical grid (we'll need one too) and the trains run on-time and 3x faster than they run here. Oh - and they ALSO have a health care system ranked best in the world that COMBINES a public option with private health insurance companies
>>Again, you have to experience their medical practices and policies and their standard of living vs the US. I was in Paris a few years ago when they were placing all business's under the government. I would never want to be a French citizen although I like the country. Do you have any idea how much they spend for national protection vs what the USA pays to protect them.
They are a rather large housing project that has learned how to "work the kindness and generosity of the United States citizen". Regarding slave to big oil..If you drive from the western coast of France to the German boarder you will see the difference between that and driving from NYC to San Fran, Miami, etc. Last year I drove from Paris to Italy (Florence) in just 2 days. The car did not have a catalytic converter and a gallon/liter was over $5.00.
We can LEARN from these examples. Take what WORKS and fix what DOESN'T.

I'm surprised there's not more outrage over the fact that we paid for Europe's defense during the Cold War (and still do today via NATO) and they didn't have the defense budgets we had. They were able to invest in their infrastructure while we protected them. IMO, it's time for us to pull back SOME of that umbrella so we can 'play catch up' with our own infrastructure. The fact that our only high-speed train goes barely more than half the speed of trains in Europe and Japan and we have one line from Boston to Washington while they have networks ocvering their entire respective countries.
>>This is interesting and ironic. As socialistic nations they of course had a sense of "entitlement" vis a vis the housing projects.Both were and are today living under the support of us. They built their infrastructre by using USA capital to protect them, feed their poor. Again, not unlike the Housing Projects just on a much higher level.

Before your trip I think you would benifit from going to the local Barnes and Nobel, purchasing maps of each city you will visit and study them so that when you arrive you don't spend time trying to understand where you are and what you are doing. It would also be an advantage to read up on their public transportation so you don't have to use Taxi's but can enjoy the way the citizen lives and travels.
AGAIN, I wish you a great trip.. __________________
Providence RI -> Boston MA -> Miami Beach FL -> San Francisco CA -> New York NY -> Boston MA -> Nashua NH -> Hudson NH -> ?

[Guest]

Ok, again, in order.

1) I found at least a reference stating that it was a Federal law passed some time ago that put it under the auspices of the Commerce Dept. However, the "gerrymandering" problem has nothing to do with that. Gerrymandering is specifically dividing up territory in a state to protect an incumbent by shunting people unlikely to vote for said incumbent to another district. In fact, the term was invented in Massachusettes becuase of Elbridge Gerry (MA governor in 1810) drawing up districts to benefit his party - and one looked like a salamander. If someone suspectes that a district has been gerrymandered, it's taken up with the STATE courts - becuase it's up to the states to decide how to redistrict themselves.

I also found references that state the White House has ALWAYS been closely involved in the Census. Last time (2000), remember, the concern was UNDERcounting minorities which would, presumably, benefit the Republicans.

2) Yeah, the UN *is* an association of foreign states - but that's it. An association. Just like NATO, ASEA. They are not, by any stretch of the imagination, a foreign state themselves. For that, I think the closest you could come is the European Union (EU) which is an association of sovereign states BUT those states are giving up SOME sovereignty (like a common currency) so you have a better argument for the EU than the UN. But the UN is clearly NOT a foreign power.

3) I'm still not seeing it. Clinton went through her confirmation hearings. There was a vote, she was confirmed. Case closed.

4) They have no authority to limit compensation for no reason. However, it's quite legal to say "You get this money IF you follow these rules". It's done all the time for everything from hiring civil service workers to building highways. You want the money? there are rules. Usually there's an RFP (Request For Proposal) involved. It's VERY legal.

5) You said "see above". Come again? It was a spending bill voted on in the House, the Senate and signed by the President. Spending Bills are one of Congress' main functions!

6) He can't accept money without approval. He's not accepting the Nobel Committee's money. It's just like Bush or any other President accepting an honorary degree from a university. No money, no problem. And it IS a committee, it's not the government of Sweden - they just happen to have their offices in Stockholm.

On to the socialism topic.

You're right. I went from "housing" to "Montreal" without explaining myself - bad segue. Public housing, as was done in the 60s and 70s, isn't happening anymore. Cabrini-Green (Chicago) is a great example of what IS happening (demolition) to those old projects. These days it's all about mixed-use housing. You had said that (housing projects) was a good example of socialism and I was "widening the topic".

As far as the health care stuff (wait times, etc), you suggested reading the Toronto paper - actually I read the Montreal Gazette on *almost* a daily basis and that's where I read about the complaints regarding Quebec's implementation - don't know much about Ontario's. I've often said we should look at systems like Canada and the UK and LEARN FROM THEIR MISTAKES. Do what they do well, and improve on things that need improving. We *should* be able to do that.

I think a fair comparison would be to look at the 'wait times' in other countries versus the 'wait times' for those receiving Medicaid/Medicare. No, I don't have that information at the moment. However, the thing that can't be denied is that procedures are FAR more expensive here than in other countries. That's something that HAS to be addressed. I mean, if an ER viisit didn't cost so much that it would push someone into bankruptcy, maybe we wouldn't be referring to this as a "health care crisis".

[Slave to Big Oil]
Yeah, I know about the $6/gal gas (adjusted for foreign exchange and metric conversions). Hasn't stopped them from driving - while the taxes on 'petrol' seems to fund a truly spectacular public transportation network. Only New York City can even come CLOSE to the maps I've seen for other cities. And it's like every little medium sized city at least has it's own tram (light rail/trolley) network!

I very much plan to use public transportation. There's a possibility that I might not drive at all during this trip. W're flying to Paris and spending a few days there. My fiancee and I agree on making sure we have a hotel close to the Paris Metro. Later we're taking the Eurostar to London (which should elicit cries of "why can't WE have this?" along the way). I'm looking forward to a few days around London (where my duaghter spent a semester in college) on the Tube/Underground. Then it's going to be up to Scotland where my fiancee spent a semester in college for a bit before heading to Ireland (probably by ferry) and then a flight back to Boston.

I'm hoping that we can get a good feeling for the places we're visiting, even though we have to rush things a bit to fit them all into 2 weeks. And, yeah, I've been to Barnes & Noble and spent $60 or so on some books.

[Guest]

On a positive note..In Paris I would suggest taking an "American Express" half day tour, sit in the front and mark on a Paris map the places where they don't stop and go back to the ones you still want to see. This is a good way of getting acquainted with a city and optimize expense. It is a great place for a honeymoon..
In London I think the on and off bus is a good way to go if you want to jump to a few locations. This is also very good in NY City for tourists.
Rather than taking the fast train from Paris you may want to consider going to Calais and take the Hovercraft and then the train from Dover to London. This is only if you have time.
Last: I did not recommend reading the Canadian Newspaper but rather the UK newspaper "Daily Mail". It is a good newspaper to stay on top of England.

[Guest]

djplong
"I found at least a reference stating that it was a Federal law passed some time ago that put it under the auspices of the Commerce Dept. However, the "gerrymandering" problem has nothing to do with that. Gerrymandering is specifically dividing up territory in a state to protect an incumbent by shunting people unlikely to vote for said incumbent to another district. In fact, the term was invented in Massachusettes becuase of Elbridge Gerry (MA governor in 1810) drawing up districts to benefit his party - and one looked like a salamander. If someone suspectes that a district has been gerrymandered, it's taken up with the STATE courts - becuase it's up to the states to decide how to redistrict themselves."


The census is under the commerce dept to prevent political interference. I have investigated your claim about 2000 and find nothing and believe that the census was completed under the Clinton WH.

The take over by Rahm Emanuel was not made public until Gregg who was appointed as commerce secy, and proudly proclaimed by the Obama administration as a Republican QUIT because of finding out the plans to take over the census.

This in addition until the %^&* hit the fan on ACORN they in fact were the first choice by this WH to be the prime organization to conduct the census !

[Guest]

On a positive note..In Paris I would suggest taking an "American Express" half day tour, sit in the front and mark on a Paris map the places where they don't stop and go back to the ones you still want to see. This is a good way of getting acquainted with a city and optimize expense. It is a great place for a honeymoon..
In London I think the on and off bus is a good way to go if you want to jump to a few locations. This is also very good in NY City for tourists.
Rather than taking the fast train from Paris you may want to consider going to Calais and take the Hovercraft and then the train from Dover to London. This is only if you have time.
Last: I did not recommend reading the Canadian Newspaper but rather the UK newspaper "Daily Mail". It is a good newspaper to stay on top of England.

Yeah, I blurred together the talk of Toronto, socialism, health care waiting lists and newspapers.. It was in the Montreal Gazette where I learned of the court cases against the Quebec implementation and the citizen's outcry over the waits for certain pediatric procedures. To be honest I was thinking of checking out the London Times. I've only occasionally read links to articles in The Independant and Guardian - but mostly BBC News when it comes to the UK.

I'll definitely have maps committed to memory and backed up with my new smartphone that is GSM (meaning it can handle the networks overseas) compatible with a GPS :)

The reason, other than speed, that we're taking the Eurostar is, quite frankly, because I'm a rail fan. I love trains and I've wanted to go through "The Chunnel" since it the project was announced. I wanted a chance to sample REAL High Speed Rail as opposed to the Almost High Speed Rail that we have here with the Acela from Boston to D.C.

Believe me, I'm listening to a LOT of people for ideas on things to keep in mind for this trip :) Thanks!

[Guest]

The census is under the commerce dept to prevent political interference. I have investigated your claim about 2000 and find nothing and believe that the census was completed under the Clinton WH.
...
This in addition until the %^&* hit the fan on ACORN they in fact were the first choice by this WH to be the prime organization to conduct the census !

1) Remember, this was after the GOP won the House. I remember the "undercounting" complaints but there was nothing as formal as, say, congressional hearings about it.

2) Given the numbers I saw in my research, there's NO WAY ACORN could have been the prime contractor. There's just too many places to cover where ACORN doesn't exist. Now, I *do* agree with you that ACORN was being considered in many cities to be *a* major contractor. Easy to remember that since Judd Gregg is from my state so we heard a LOT when he took his name out from being considered for that appointment.

[Guest]

1) remember, this was after the gop won the house. I remember the "undercounting" complaints but there was nothing as formal as, say, congressional hearings about it.

2) given the numbers i saw in my research, there's no way acorn could have been the prime contractor. There's just too many places to cover where acorn doesn't exist. Now, i *do* agree with you that acorn was being considered in many cities to be *a* major contractor. Easy to remember that since judd gregg is from my state so we heard a lot when he took his name out from being considered for that appointment.


and most importantly, it was not run from the White House as this WH want(s)(ed)

[Guest]

And, coincidentally, I got my census forms in the mail today. They certainly didn't come from ACORN. To be honest, with all the scams going around, I was looking for any indication that these were spoofs or frauds of some kind.