Anger is good

[Guest]

when it is for liberal causes. Anger is bad when it is for conservative causes. The government controlled media tries to tell us that our anger is racist or homophobic to down play or trivialize our rebellion. Conservatives have every right to protest. Protesting has been something traditional for liberals over the years as the majority of Americans just go about their business. The media would be there with their cameras to show on the 6 o'clock news.(think Vietnam)
Now that average citizens across America are protesting, the media attempts to hide it by not covering it and twisting information to trivialize or condemn the protesters as bad or immoral people.
We the people cannot be beaten down by the progressive media's propaganda. It is our right to protest what they are attempting to do to our country.
Remember, you are going to be bombarded with the mantra:
Taxes are good and necessary.( I have read it here on this forum)
Protesting is bad.

It seems like yesterday when the liberals said that protesting was patriotic. Now they say it is bad. Wake up people!!!!

http://www.dailygut.com/?i=4529

[Guest]

when it is for liberal causes. Anger is bad when it is for conservative causes. The government controlled media tries to tell us that our anger is racist or homophobic to down play or trivialize our rebellion. Conservatives have every right to protest. Protesting has been something traditional for liberals over the years as the majority of Americans just go about their business. The media would be there with their cameras to show on the 6 o'clock news.(think Vietnam)
Now that average citizens across America are protesting, the media attempts to hide it by not covering it and twisting information to trivialize or condemn the protesters as bad or immoral people.
We the people cannot be beaten down by the progressive media's propaganda. It is our right to protest what they are attempting to do to our country.
Remember, you are going to be bombarded with the mantra:
Taxes are good and necessary.( I have read it here on this forum)
Protesting is bad.

It seems like yesterday when the liberals said that protesting was patriotic. Now they say it is bad. Wake up people!!!!

http://www.dailygut.com/?i=4529

Yes people did say Bush was a Nazi and many people on this site call Obama a socialist. Insults from the left and right. Neither side was or is correct.

But spitting on people, hurling the N word or F word at Congressmen is just plain wrong whoever does it right or left. The threat of gun violence is uncalled for and even the Tea Party has condemed the practice.

I was very upset at many things that Bush and Company did in the 8 years they were in power...but not once did I reach for my gun. Oh wait a minute I don't own a gun.

[Guest]

upholding and protecting the United States Constitution eliminates the need for anger.

Yoda

[Guest]

upholding and protecting the United States Constitution eliminates the need for anger.

Yoda


Apparently not!

[Guest]

upholding and protecting the United States Constitution eliminates the need for anger.

Yoda

Your are correct and they will pay in November.

[Guest]

of a cross hair to "target" the democratic seats to upset in November. The terminology of "targeting" has been used for who knows how long without commentary. As is the use of a cross hair on a subject to infer "targeting".
None of which ever intended the use of violence in anyway what so ever....until now. The distortion of the intent by using these terms and graphics only confirms the lengths the hypocritical opposition will take.
And of course that the persona involved, Palin, is their constant "target".
Hence trying to get the public at large off the real subject....a tactic that has worn out it's use and or contributed value on thinking Americans.

Finally the silent majority is beginning to stir and some are getting nervous about it and continue to discredit actions "aimed" at standing and being counted.....

I find it utterly amusing in this era of the words are mightier than the deeds that some media and individuals have the nerve to criticize others.
How consistently hypocritical!!!!!!!!!!!!

btk

[Guest]

of a cross hair to "target" the democratic seats to upset in November. The terminology of "targeting" has been used for who knows how long without commentary. As is the use of a cross hair on a subject to infer "targeting".
None of which ever intended the use of violence in anyway what so ever....until now. The distortion of the intent by using these terms and graphics only confirms the lengths the hypocritical opposition will take.
And of course that the persona involved, Palin, is their constant "target".
Hence trying to get the public at large off the real subject....a tactic that has worn out it's use and or contributed value on thinking Americans.

Finally the silent majority is beginning to stir and some are getting nervous about it and continue to discredit actions "aimed" at standing and being counted.....

I find it utterly amusing in this era of the words are mightier than the deeds that some media and individuals have the nerve to criticize others.
How consistently hypocritical!!!!!!!!!!!!

btk

Targeting can be indicated without using a gun sight symbol! The use of this symbol implies the use of a gun which, by its nature, is violent. In light of the nasty crowds using the N word and spitting on elected officals.....gas line being cut. One simply cannot look the other way.

And geez I thought Bush was the constant target of the liberals not Palin.

[Guest]

Targeting can be indicated without using a gun sight symbol! The use of this symbol implies the use of a gun which, by its nature, is violent. In light of the nasty crowds using the N word and spitting on elected officals.....gas line being cut. One simply cannot look the other way.

And geez I thought Bush was the constant target of the liberals not Palin.

That video was played over and over again and no "n" word or spitting was seen or heard.

This is just the liberals trying to divert the attention from where it belongs

The fact of the matter is that they just passed an illegal bill that is against everything our constitution represents.
Angry is good. Angry crowds are part of our heritage going back to the early days of our founding.
Don't you people get tired of the same old tactics?

[Guest]

That video was played over and over again and no "n" word or spitting was seen or heard.

This is just the liberals trying to divert the attention from where it belongs

The fact of the matter is that they just passed an illegal bill that is against everything our constitution represents.
Angry is good. Angry crowds are part of our heritage going back to the early days of our founding.
Don't you people get tired of the same old tactics?

That is just BS....I just watched the video and you can clearly see what happens. Was the gas line not cut either?

[Guest]

That is just BS....I just watched the video and you can clearly see what happens. Was the gas line not cut either?

It is horrible the violence from the left (aka Democrats) against peaceful tea partiers!!!
http://www.foundingbloggers.com/wordpress/2010/03/harry-reid-supporters-threaten-violence-against-breitbart-at-tea-party-protest/


Anger is good and healthy but the Democrats take it too far, just like they did when Bush was president.

[Guest]

It is horrible the violence from the left (aka Democrats) against peaceful tea partiers!!!
http://www.foundingbloggers.com/wordpress/2010/03/harry-reid-supporters-threaten-violence-against-breitbart-at-tea-party-protest/


Anger is good and healthy but the Democrats take it too far, just like they did when Bush was president.

I could have predicted that you would come up with some obscure link to show that the Democrats also do it. But the post clearly says this guy threatened violence...they did not spit on Breitbart. Did anyone from the left spit on Bush? Did any member of the Democratic party cry out "You Lie" during the State of the Union Speech" Those answers would be a know.

You quote horrible violence.....show me because this link clearly states no violence took place.

Did you look at the video of the spitting incidence or did you just let Fox tell you what happened?

[Guest]

I could have predicted that you would come up with some obscure link to show that the Democrats also do it. But the post clearly says this guy threatened violence...they did not spit on Breitbart. Did anyone from the left spit on Bush? Did any member of the Democratic party cry out "You Lie" during the State of the Union Speech" Those answers would be a know.

You quote horrible violence.....show me because this link clearly states no violence took place.

Did you look at the video of the spitting incidence or did you just let Fox tell you what happened?

WOW....an angry arguement to decide who started the being angry...such a waste of time

PS: All Donna did was post a blog that decried the media coverage which even you cannot dispute is a one way street !

[Guest]

I could have predicted that you would come up with some obscure link to show that the Democrats also do it. But the post clearly says this guy threatened violence...they did not spit on Breitbart. Did anyone from the left spit on Bush? Did any member of the Democratic party cry out "You Lie" during the State of the Union Speech" Those answers would be a know.

You quote horrible violence.....show me because this link clearly states no violence took place.

Did you look at the video of the spitting incidence or did you just let Fox tell you what happened?

This is a joke, right? Spitting is horrible violence. LOL

[Guest]

I do think Donna did a little more than post an anger blog. Her link is bogus...Her generalizations are bugus...government controlled media is bogus....denying the N video is bogus...You don't like what you read or hear...so continue to assume the info is false,far-fetched and extreme.

[Guest]

I do think Donna did a little more than post an anger blog. Her link is bogus...Her generalizations are bugus...government controlled media is bogus....denying the N video is bogus...You don't like what you read or hear...so continue to assume the info is false,far-fetched and extreme.

I did not respond to Donna's post....I responded to COLOGAL's post !!!

As far as media bias is concerned, there cannot be a brain around that, after this past election campaign, will not admit to the bias that exists in the media.....that is a given !

[Guest]

I do think Donna did a little more than post an anger blog. Her link is bogus...Her generalizations are bugus...government controlled media is bogus....denying the N video is bogus...You don't like what you read or hear...so continue to assume the info is false,far-fetched and extreme.

I'll tell you something that is not bogus. I went to my first tea party demonstration last year on April 15th. What I seen there is a bunch of ordinary people who were concerned where the USA was heading. They were concerned about the deficit, socialized medicine, unemployment. losing their homes etc. Some polls say that 50-70% of the people were against the government takeover of health care. Congress is at the lowest ratings of all time. Pelosi and Reid have a favorable rating of around 8.
This congress is not listening to the people who they are supposed to represent. You betcha there is anger out there. Maybe even as angry as the Bush haters of the previous 8 years.
But we all know what the government media's strategy. Attack the credibility of the protesters. Always, always ridicule the opposition. Call them racists, call them bigots, discredit , discredit.

It is not going to work. The people will not be silenced by the media. Congress apparently didn't listen to Massachusetts when they took over the Senate seat that was Kennedy's for decades. Nobody in their right mind would predict that Scott Brown would win the senate election.
This anger will not go away before November. I guarantee it will not.
WE will see what is BOGUS November 2010.

[Guest]

This is a joke, right? Spitting is horrible violence. LOL
No Donna you are the one who said the left was using horrible violence not I.

And I asked you several questions....

You always bring things back to what the left did to Bush....

So did any lefty spit on Bush or any GOP person?

Did any Democrat yell "You LIE" at the Bush during any of the 8 States of the Union addresses he gave?

[Guest]

It is horrible the violence from the left (aka Democrats) against peaceful tea partiers!!!
http://www.foundingbloggers.com/wordpress/2010/03/harry-reid-supporters-threaten-violence-against-breitbart-at-tea-party-protest/


Anger is good and healthy but the Democrats take it too far, just like they did when Bush was president.

Lest you forget....here is where YOU used the words horrible violence and provided a link. The link is even entitled reid supports threaten violence

Where is the horrible violence from the left?

[Guest]

I did not respond to Donna's post....I responded to COLOGAL's post !!!

As far as media bias is concerned, there cannot be a brain around that, after this past election campaign, will not admit to the bias that exists in the media.....that is a given !

Bucco....if I said the grass was green you would tell me it was red.

[Guest]

Bucco....if I said the grass was green you would tell me it was red.

All the crying wolf and fake indignation won't mean anything once the sissies are voted out.

[Guest]

No Donna you are the one who said the left was using horrible violence not I.

And I asked you several questions....

You always bring things back to what the left did to Bush....

So did any lefty spit on Bush or any GOP person?

Did any Democrat yell "You LIE" at the Bush during any of the 8 States of the Union addresses he gave?


Perhaps you may want to watch this video of ALL the Democrats heckling and booing the President during the State of the Union address in 2005, but you will say that was justified of course.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/09/10/flashback_democrats_boo_bush_at_2005_state_of_the_ union.html

There is so much more that you seem to handily forget in your PARTY first mentality.

Wake up....we just passed bill that likely will bankrupt this country very soon !

[Guest]

Bucco....if I said the grass was green you would tell me it was red.


Probably because your posts are truely PARTY oriented. I certainly am not a fan of President Obama and this congress and will not shy away from saying it, but I have many times criticized Bush....I dont spend my time looking for threads that give me a chance to spout the party line.

Forget the Democratic party (I know, I know, you once voted for a Republican..you said that a number of times) and discuss the issues without the reference to party.

I have crticized this President manytimes and this congress, but very few times mention their party, nor try to make one party look like the good guys and the other like the bad guys...they both do all the same things, but you only post to defend the Democrats or get after the Republicans.

So, as long as you do that, Yeah...I probably will disagree with you !

[Guest]

My thoughts on the Tea Partiers....they are almost all white,74% of them are republicans...not a single African-American Repub in the house or senate since 2003. We have a black Pres. a female speaker,a Latino on the Supreme court and a powerful gay committee chair. I don't think it's health care,taxes or any of the other stuff. There are signals everywhere of an immutable change in the very identity of America not just governance. I think the tea party people are afraid that they will lose their piece of the pie to these "different" Americans. The status quo is good for them. Any change is bad for their position. I think they fear losing what they have and this fear is real. So they look for a scapegoat to blame EVERYTHING on and Obama is perfect because he is trying to change the landscape,ignoring the status quo. For that he is a socialist,communist,fascist,anti-Christ and every other name you can think of.For all that Bush and the repubs ignored for 8 years Obama is trying to solve. Do I agree with all of it..no. But there can be no denying that he has an agenda. Some of us agree with it others do not.

[Guest]

My thoughts on the Tea Partiers....they are almost all white,74% of them are republicans...not a single African-American Repub in the house or senate since 2003. We have a black Pres. a female speaker,a Latino on the Supreme court and a powerful gay committee chair. I don't think it's health care,taxes or any of the other stuff. There are signals everywhere of an immutable change in the very identity of America not just governance. I think the tea party people are afraid that they will lose their piece of the pie to these "different" Americans. The status quo is good for them. Any change is bad for their position. I think they fear losing what they have and this fear is real. So they look for a scapegoat to blame EVERYTHING on and Obama is perfect because he is trying to change the landscape,ignoring the status quo. For that he is a socialist,communist,fascist,anti-Christ and every other name you can think of.For all that Bush and the repubs ignored for 8 years Obama is trying to solve. Do I agree with all of it..no. But there can be no denying that he has an agenda. Some of us agree with it others do not.

There is the typical race baiting stuff the democrats have been applying for years. You should be ashamed of yourself.
You seem to forget President Bush had the first Black Secretary Of State Rice that the democrats called aunt Jemima. The democrats down-played her achievements because she wasn't a democrat. The hypocrisy is astounding. Who put Justice Thomas on the Supreme Court? Another Black that the democrats belittle because he is not a Democrat.
The Republicans also have a black chairman. The only thing the Tea Party are afraid they are going to lose is our country. We are afraid of the democrats tearing up the Constitution in favor of Socialism and wealth distribution. (communism) We are also afraid of Obama disrespecting our allies and praising dictators. WE are sick and tired of Obama apologizing for the greatest nation in history like we did something wrong when we are the most generous country ever.
We are afraid of these sweeping socialistic bills that will take over 20% of the economy disguised as a "health care bill"
I'm also afraid that it will take generations to heal this country of the damage that this congress and president have caused.

I fear for the children that will have to pay for this boongdoggle of a bill, and a countru whose constitution has been shredded.

[Guest]

My thoughts on the Tea Partiers....they are almost all white,74% of them are republicans...not a single African-American Repub in the house or senate since 2003. We have a black Pres. a female speaker,a Latino on the Supreme court and a powerful gay committee chair. I don't think it's health care,taxes or any of the other stuff. There are signals everywhere of an immutable change in the very identity of America not just governance. I think the tea party people are afraid that they will lose their piece of the pie to these "different" Americans. The status quo is good for them. Any change is bad for their position. I think they fear losing what they have and this fear is real. So they look for a scapegoat to blame EVERYTHING on and Obama is perfect because he is trying to change the landscape,ignoring the status quo. For that he is a socialist,communist,fascist,anti-Christ and every other name you can think of.For all that Bush and the repubs ignored for 8 years Obama is trying to solve. Do I agree with all of it..no. But there can be no denying that he has an agenda. Some of us agree with it others do not.


I discount this post immediately as you bring up race....this was the mantra on this board this past election campaign. If you oppose Obama you are a racist and frankly I am sick of it and do not understand those who constantly bring it up.

There are racists in every group and always have been, but do not tell me that because I oppose big government of this President that race even entered into it....this is insulting !!!

And while you worship at Obamas feet saying all the right things which are mainly that he is cleaning up Bush's mess (while actually he continues most of his policies) look around at what is happening the name of change and transparency ......

[Guest]

This kinda sums up my feelings.
http://www.city-journal.org/2010/eon0328mm.html

[Guest]

Perhaps you may want to watch this video of ALL the Democrats heckling and booing the President during the State of the Union address in 2005, but you will say that was justified of course.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2009/09/10/flashback_democrats_boo_bush_at_2005_state_of_the_ union.html

There is so much more that you seem to handily forget in your PARTY first mentality.

Wake up....we just passed bill that likely will bankrupt this country very soon !

Yes Donna...it is part of the process for one party to stand up and cheer and the other to sit on their hands. It is also standard practice to boo and whistle...but I asked you if any Dem made a direct statement like Joe Wilson did when he said "You Lie". But we both no the answer to that.

You claim only the Dems do these things and I won't admit it...but you need to look at yourself and your party as well.

[Guest]

Yes Donna...it is part of the process for one party to stand up and cheer and the other to sit on their hands. It is also standard practice to boo and whistle...but I asked you if any Dem made a direct statement like Joe Wilson did when he said "You Lie". But we both no the answer to that.

You claim only the Dems do these things and I won't admit it...but you need to look at yourself and your party as well.

And when Joe Wilson told the truth millions of patriots cheered!!!

[Guest]

And when Joe Wilson told the truth millions of patriots cheered!!!

Thank you.....you made my point. And they are no patriots.

[Guest]

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-28242-Election-Reform-Examiner~y2010m3d28-White-women-are-the-new-angry-white-men

[Guest]

opinion/beliefs......but on some things like this current post....you must get awfully lonely way out there in left filed!!!!!!!!!

How about a novel concept? Some of us do not care what a persons' religion or color or party or gender is and make our judgments based on whether we agree with them or not....whether any of us are right or wrong, it is our opinion.

The current administration and it's supporters are NOTORIOUS for categorizing and or type casting ANYBODY that does not agree with or blindly accept what is put forth.

The state of partisan politics in this country is the worst it has ever been and is a disease that is ruining the America some of us are used to having.

btk

[Guest]

opinion/beliefs......but on some things like this current post....you must get awfully lonely way out there in left filed!!!!!!!!!

How about a novel concept? Some of us do not care what a persons' religion or color or party or gender is and make our judgments based on whether we agree with them or not....whether any of us are right or wrong, it is our opinion.

The current administration and it's supporters are NOTORIOUS for categorizing and or type casting ANYBODY that does not agree with or blindly accept what is put forth.

The state of partisan politics in this country is the worst it has ever been and is a disease that is ruining the America some of us are used to having.

btk

Actually I am left of you but definitely in center_left_field..... so I offer this link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36075836/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

More Patriot's?..anybody want to guess if they were card carrying NRA members? This is what happens when the rhetoric gets to heated.

[Guest]

http://www.examiner.com/examiner/x-28242-Election-Reform-Examiner~y2010m3d28-White-women-are-the-new-angry-white-men

Me thinks she makes Waynet's point here. :a20:

[Guest]

Actually I am left of you but definitely in center_left_field..... so I offer this link:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36075836/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

More Patriot's?..anybody want to guess if they were card carrying NRA members? This is what happens when the rhetoric gets to heated.

What has your despicable link have to do with this thread that I started? This thread is about honest hard working Americans who are witnessing our country being taken over by socialist policies that are probably unconstitutional.
You people on the left will do anything to discredit anybody who is not on board with your far-left policies.

Your post is highly inflammable and should be edited from this thread.

[Guest]

What has your despicable link have to do with this thread that I started? This thread is about honest hard working Americans who are witnessing our country being taken over by socialist policies that are probably unconstitutional.
You people on the left will do anything to discredit anybody who is not on board with your far-left policies.

Your post is highly inflammable and should be edited from this thread.

Donna you are correct. This is pure Liberal hate speech.

[Guest]

Donna you are correct. This is pure Liberal hate speech.

I am sure that law abiding NRA members are not happy with her linking them to cop killers, either. Disgusting.

[Guest]

With all due respect to everyone, we should focus on the issues, holding on to what is left of our US Constitution and restoring this country financially, morally and emotionally. We shouldn't fall into the argument of which side did what or who is worse.

It's easy to resort to name calling and spitting rhetoric. Both sides will use it to their dirty advantage. The Democrats are going to blame the recent "threats of violence" against Congressional Dems on Republicans and use the "threats" as a fundraising tool!!

"A senior adviser to the president said his party was not out of bounds in issuing fundraising appeals linked to recent threats of violence against congressional Democrats," according to CNN Political Ticker.


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/28/axelrod-weighs-in-on-dem-fundraising-appeals-related-to-threats/


"Obama senior adviser David Axelrod also suggested congressional Republicans bore some responsibility for the overheated rhetoric and incidents of vandalism directed at Democrats."

I recall the threats against AIG employees and people were asking for names of family members and AIG employees' children were even being threatened. One threat was of strangling AIG employees with piano wire. When AIG CEO Edward Liddy said he was afraid to release the names of employee who had returned all or part of their bonuses, Barney Frank basically said tough, let the police handle it if something happens but release the names or be subpoenaed.

I watched Black Panthers standing at the front door of a polling place holding a black-jack club hitting it into his hand during the last Presidential election!
I remember an Iraqi journalist throwing shoes at our President.
You know what Bush said? Did he say let's use this as a fundraiser? No.

"So what if the guy threw his shoe at me?" Bush told a reporter in response to a question about the incident.

"Let me talk about the guy throwing his shoe. It's one way to gain attention. It's like going to a political rally and having people yell at you. It's like driving down the street and having people not gesturing with all five fingers. ...

"These journalists here were very apologetic. They ... said this doesn't represent the Iraqi people, but that's what happens in free societies where people try to draw attention to themselves."

Republican Minority Whip Eric Cantor had a bullet shot through his Richmond, Va., office. A man was just arrested today, who authorities believe was the shooter, for posting a Youtube video threatening Cantor. Cantor's response when the bullet was shot through his campaign office, "Let me be clear -- I do not condone violence," Cantor said at the start of his press event. "There are no leaders in this building, no rank and file members in this building, that condone violence, period."

Then he contrasted his own actions with those of Democrats who have been harassed:

"I've received threats since I assumed elected office, not only because of my position but also because I'm Jewish. I've never blamed anyone in this body for that, period. Any suggestion that a leader in this body would incite threats or acts against other members is akin to saying that I would endanger myself, my wife or my children. Just recently I have been directly threatened. A bullet was shot through the window of my campaign office in Richmond this week, and I've received threatening e-mails. But I will not release them, because I believe such actions will only encourage more to be sent," he said.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/03/cantor-lashes-out-at-democrats.html

It happens on both sides. What both sides are doing should be what we are looking at.

[Guest]

What has your despicable link have to do with this thread that I started? This thread is about honest hard working Americans who are witnessing our country being taken over by socialist policies that are probably unconstitutional.
You people on the left will do anything to discredit anybody who is not on board with your far-left policies.

Your post is highly inflammable and should be edited from this thread.

So let me get this straight...a story from the national news about a bunch of right wing, gun carrying Christians who wanted to start a movement to overthrow the current government (from the story not my words) is highly inflammatory... But you respond with an inflammatory comment about the socialist government and its probable unconstitutional policies and thats ok.

Sure....

You can call me anything but that doesn't mean it is true...I am no more a lefty than you are. I may be left of you but no where near a lefty. You can't change reality.....

[Guest]

Yes Donna...it is part of the process for one party to stand up and cheer and the other to sit on their hands. It is also standard practice to boo and whistle...but I asked you if any Dem made a direct statement like Joe Wilson did when he said "You Lie". But we both no the answer to that.

You claim only the Dems do these things and I won't admit it...but you need to look at yourself and your party as well.


Amazing to behold that what was booed.....that SS is going down the tube is what happened..go figure !

[Guest]

With all due respect to everyone, we should focus on the issues, holding on to what is left of our US Constitution and restoring this country financially, morally and emotionally. We shouldn't fall into the argument of which side did what or who is worse.

It's easy to resort to name calling and spitting rhetoric. Both sides will use it to their dirty advantage. The Democrats are going to blame the recent "threats of violence" against Congressional Dems on Republicans and use the "threats" as a fundraising tool!!

"A senior adviser to the president said his party was not out of bounds in issuing fundraising appeals linked to recent threats of violence against congressional Democrats," according to CNN Political Ticker.


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/28/axelrod-weighs-in-on-dem-fundraising-appeals-related-to-threats/


"Obama senior adviser David Axelrod also suggested congressional Republicans bore some responsibility for the overheated rhetoric and incidents of vandalism directed at Democrats."

I recall the threats against AIG employees and people were asking for names of family members and AIG employees' children were even being threatened. One threat was of strangling AIG employees with piano wire. When AIG CEO Edward Liddy said he was afraid to release the names of employee who had returned all or part of their bonuses, Barney Frank basically said tough, let the police handle it if something happens but release the names or be subpoenaed.

I watched Black Panthers standing at the front door of a polling place holding a black-jack club hitting it into his hand during the last Presidential election!
I remember an Iraqi journalist throwing shoes at our President.
You know what Bush said? Did he say let's use this as a fundraiser? No.

"So what if the guy threw his shoe at me?" Bush told a reporter in response to a question about the incident.

"Let me talk about the guy throwing his shoe. It's one way to gain attention. It's like going to a political rally and having people yell at you. It's like driving down the street and having people not gesturing with all five fingers. ...

"These journalists here were very apologetic. They ... said this doesn't represent the Iraqi people, but that's what happens in free societies where people try to draw attention to themselves."

Republican Minority Whip Eric Cantor had a bullet shot through his Richmond, Va., office. A man was just arrested today, who authorities believe was the shooter, for posting a Youtube video threatening Cantor. Cantor's response when the bullet was shot through his campaign office, "Let me be clear -- I do not condone violence," Cantor said at the start of his press event. "There are no leaders in this building, no rank and file members in this building, that condone violence, period."

Then he contrasted his own actions with those of Democrats who have been harassed:

"I've received threats since I assumed elected office, not only because of my position but also because I'm Jewish. I've never blamed anyone in this body for that, period. Any suggestion that a leader in this body would incite threats or acts against other members is akin to saying that I would endanger myself, my wife or my children. Just recently I have been directly threatened. A bullet was shot through the window of my campaign office in Richmond this week, and I've received threatening e-mails. But I will not release them, because I believe such actions will only encourage more to be sent," he said.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/03/cantor-lashes-out-at-democrats.html

It happens on both sides. What both sides are doing should be what we are looking at.

The bullet he referred to, as if it was directed to him and his office, turned out to be one randomly fired in the air which ricocheted of another building. This was widely reported several days ago. The gas lines cut at was thought to be a Democratic Congressman's house, after a Republican blogger incorrectly posted the address on-line, were confirmed to have been cut deliberately.

But I agree with your last statement both sides need to tone down things before some whack job does something stupid.

[Guest]

Donna you are correct. This is pure Liberal hate speech.


Cashman...Please point out the Hate speech I employed in that post.

[Guest]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36084257/ns/politics-capitol_hill/

[Guest]

With all due respect to everyone, we should focus on the issues, holding on to what is left of our US Constitution and restoring this country financially, morally and emotionally. We shouldn't fall into the argument of which side did what or who is worse.

It's easy to resort to name calling and spitting rhetoric. Both sides will use it to their dirty advantage. The Democrats are going to blame the recent "threats of violence" against Congressional Dems on Republicans and use the "threats" as a fundraising tool!!

"A senior adviser to the president said his party was not out of bounds in issuing fundraising appeals linked to recent threats of violence against congressional Democrats," according to CNN Political Ticker.


http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/03/28/axelrod-weighs-in-on-dem-fundraising-appeals-related-to-threats/


"Obama senior adviser David Axelrod also suggested congressional Republicans bore some responsibility for the overheated rhetoric and incidents of vandalism directed at Democrats."

I recall the threats against AIG employees and people were asking for names of family members and AIG employees' children were even being threatened. One threat was of strangling AIG employees with piano wire. When AIG CEO Edward Liddy said he was afraid to release the names of employee who had returned all or part of their bonuses, Barney Frank basically said tough, let the police handle it if something happens but release the names or be subpoenaed.

I watched Black Panthers standing at the front door of a polling place holding a black-jack club hitting it into his hand during the last Presidential election!
I remember an Iraqi journalist throwing shoes at our President.
You know what Bush said? Did he say let's use this as a fundraiser? No.

"So what if the guy threw his shoe at me?" Bush told a reporter in response to a question about the incident.

"Let me talk about the guy throwing his shoe. It's one way to gain attention. It's like going to a political rally and having people yell at you. It's like driving down the street and having people not gesturing with all five fingers. ...

"These journalists here were very apologetic. They ... said this doesn't represent the Iraqi people, but that's what happens in free societies where people try to draw attention to themselves."

Republican Minority Whip Eric Cantor had a bullet shot through his Richmond, Va., office. A man was just arrested today, who authorities believe was the shooter, for posting a Youtube video threatening Cantor. Cantor's response when the bullet was shot through his campaign office, "Let me be clear -- I do not condone violence," Cantor said at the start of his press event. "There are no leaders in this building, no rank and file members in this building, that condone violence, period."

Then he contrasted his own actions with those of Democrats who have been harassed:

"I've received threats since I assumed elected office, not only because of my position but also because I'm Jewish. I've never blamed anyone in this body for that, period. Any suggestion that a leader in this body would incite threats or acts against other members is akin to saying that I would endanger myself, my wife or my children. Just recently I have been directly threatened. A bullet was shot through the window of my campaign office in Richmond this week, and I've received threatening e-mails. But I will not release them, because I believe such actions will only encourage more to be sent," he said.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/03/cantor-lashes-out-at-democrats.html

It happens on both sides. What both sides are doing should be what we are looking at.

I agree in general with what you are saying.

There are those who ONLY post on here in a general sense if there is some "dissing" to do on a personal level and you very seldom here from them on issues !

My reason for posting in this thread and still posting is because the campaign last fall made me very sensitive to this race crap...and that is what is ...CRAP !

It just seems that every criticism is met with the race card. I criticized Obama on here before he was President and was deemed a racist although I never mentioned or alluded to race..only his policies. That hurt a lot and if you knew my background you would understand but not going to bore anyone with that.

NOW....all of sudden there is a push to call anyone who is right as a racist.....Where in the world did that come from...and why. We have this guy WAYNET come on here and quote EXACT percentages of how many whites are whatever...who in the world keeps those statistics. I assume some writer made it up and away people like Wayne go.

Nobody disagrees with President Obama more than I do....nobody would love to see this congress out on their ear SOON....nobody could oppose a bill as much as I oppose the stupid, political mess they call the health bill, but NOBODY can ever call me a racist of even someone who even thinks about it.

I truely wonder about folks who continually do that....something wrong !

[Guest]

Bucco, you are acting just like they want you to act, defensively. They are trying to discredit anybody that doesn't follow their mindset. It is the old divide and conquer theme, so to speak. They want to quiet the opposition. When they protested it was patriotic. When the opposition protests we are racists. Oldest trick in the book.

As far as I'm concerned this president is worse for this country then the terrible Jimmy Carter. He does not respect anything about this country. He goes around the world dissing the USA and he won't even salute it's flag. He obviously don't care that the unemployment rate is 20% and he don't care that he and congress just passed the most destructive bill in history. A bill that will bring us to ruin.
At least Jimmy Carter was a veteran and a patriot, he was just a very bad president.

[Guest]

Bucco, you are acting just like they want you to act, defensively. They are trying to discredit anybody that doesn't follow their mindset. It is the old divide and conquer theme, so to speak. They want to quiet the opposition. When they protested it was patriotic. When the opposition protests we are racists. Oldest trick in the book.

As far as I'm concerned this president is worse for this country then the terrible Jimmy Carter. He does not respect anything about this country. He goes around the world dissing the USA and he won't even salute it's flag. He obviously don't care that the unemployment rate is 20% and he don't care that he and congress just passed the most destructive bill in history. A bill that will bring us to ruin.
At least Jimmy Carter was a veteran and a patriot, he was just a very bad president.

This statement is simply untrue.....He goes around the world dissing the USA and he won't even salute it's flag. Where do you get this stuff from?

And the unemployment rate is running nationally at 10% not 20%.

[Guest]

This statement is simply untrue.....He goes around the world dissing the USA and he won't even salute it's flag. Where do you get this stuff from?

And the unemployment rate is running nationally at 10% not 20%.

Your wrong. Just ask the discouraged people who haven't worked in over 2 years. The 10% you quote is only people who are currently collecting unemployment. It is estimated at close to 20% and that doesn't include the millions of people who can't find full-time work and have 2 or more low paying part-time jobs.
Tens of thousands getting laid off every month and the only one hiring is the government. People still losing their homes and congress ratings at are an all time low. Consumer confidence under this president is at historic lows.
Social security, for the first time is dishing out more money then coming in because of the 20% decrease in contributions because they are not working. Obama has accumulated more debt then the 43 president before him combined.
Looks like were right in line with Greece.

[Guest]

Your wrong. Just ask the discouraged people who haven't worked in over 2 years. The 10% you quote is only people who are currently collecting unemployment. It is estimated at close to 20% and that doesn't include the millions of people who can't find full-time work and have 2 or more low paying part-time jobs.
Tens of thousands getting laid off every month and the only one hiring is the government. People still losing their homes and congress ratings at are an all time low. Consumer confidence under this president is at historic lows.
Social security, for the first time is dishing out more money then coming in because of the 20% decrease in contributions because they are not working. Obama has accumulated more debt then the 43 president before him combined.
Looks like were right in line with Greece.

Do not argue with COLOGAL.....she will defend this President 100% each and every time. She will claim to be middle...she will claim lots of stuff...she only appears to agrue hate and go after people. This is the proverbial party member who will spout all the rhetoric she is fed !

She thinks Republicans are evil and Democrats are saints. Fruitless battle !

[Guest]

Your wrong. Just ask the discouraged people who haven't worked in over 2 years. The 10% you quote is only people who are currently collecting unemployment. It is estimated at close to 20% and that doesn't include the millions of people who can't find full-time work and have 2 or more low paying part-time jobs.
Tens of thousands getting laid off every month and the only one hiring is the government. People still losing their homes and congress ratings at are an all time low. Consumer confidence under this president is at historic lows.
Social security, for the first time is dishing out more money then coming in because of the 20% decrease in contributions because they are not working. Obama has accumulated more debt then the 43 president before him combined.
Looks like were right in line with Greece.

So let me get this straight...Obama has run up the national debt in the 15 months he has been in office. So I ask you what is the amount of debt that has been added, in that 15 months, to the existing national debt when he took office?

And you state that the amount is more debt than the 43 presidents before him. What's the figure? To be more precise....I don't want the total of the national debt today because that is a carryover from previous years. Only the debt added in 2009-2010.

[Guest]

Do not argue with COLOGAL.....she will defend this President 100% each and every time. She will claim to be middle...she will claim lots of stuff...she only appears to agrue hate and go after people. This is the proverbial party member who will spout all the rhetoric she is fed !

She thinks Republicans are evil and Democrats are saints. Fruitless battle !

Wow. there really is people like that out there. Totally amazing.

[Guest]

Wow. there really is people like that out there. Totally amazing.

She hates Bush and loves Obama, and that is all there is !!!

She sound like a Democrat strategist ! AND she thinks that everyone else loves Bush and hates Obama...she doesnt get anything that is not "of the party"

[Guest]

That percent reflects only those who are still eligible to collect unemployment...NOT the real unemployment rate which would include those who no longer are eligible for benefits Plus those that have given up looking for work. It has been reported that factoring in the elements, the REAL unemployment rate is closer to 18%!

That is a number you will never hear discussed by the administration or it's amplifiers called the drive by media.

And there are pockets of unemployment in differing locales approaching 30%....no reporting on these either.

btk

[Guest]

I removed a post containing copyrighted material, which necessitated removing a string of other posts responding to it or quoting it.

We will not tolerate copyright infringement. Keep your material original or quote judiciously as permitted under copyright law. If you don't know the law, please look it up at the Library of Congress.

It is also mandatory to keep it civil in here. I see that bending a little too much from time to time.

[Guest]

Cashman...Please point out the Hate speech I employed in that post.

What is a card carrying NRA member?

[Guest]

Tonight Fox News showed Karl Rove being assaulted by left-wing extremists. Where was the outrage from the government controlled media networks?

[Guest]

Apparently not!

There are those who are not trying.

Yoda

[Guest]

Targeting can be indicated without using a gun sight symbol! The use of this symbol implies the use of a gun which, by its nature, is violent. In light of the nasty crowds using the N word and spitting on elected officals.....gas line being cut. One simply cannot look the other way.

And geez I thought Bush was the constant target of the liberals not Palin.

Should we ban Target stores LOGO next?

Yoda

[Guest]

Cashman...Please point out the Hate speech I employed in that post.

I repeat what is a card carrying NRA member?

Did you or did you not use this as a negative "trope" and an "epithet" of hate to fellow Americans who legally bear arms?

You made the statement so what did you mean?

[Guest]

And guns are not indicative of violence. People are the problem not the guns. Saying a gun is responsible for violence is like saying the eraser on a pencil is responsible for mistakes.

Tis all in the eye or opinion or belief of the beholder.

My guess on the "card carrying NRA..." is it is a prejudiced, catty snipe from one who dislikes guns, attempting to categorize others in a group they are opposed to...... Usually a red flag waving, baiting phraseology.....at least that is my take on how it is used.

btk

[Guest]

Anger is all well and good - it can be a motivation to DO something.

But where do we go? What do we do?

VK says "don't vote for an incumbent". Fine, I can see that. But let's look at our choices.

We can vote for Democrats, who will have to raise taxes to cover their profligate spending. Or we could vote for Republicans who will have to raise taxes to cover their profligate spending (that was worse than previous Democrats but not quite as bad as current Democrats). Neither one of them seems to know the meaning of the phrase "cutting spending"

We can vote for Democrats who want to redefine free speech into "non-offensive speech" or we can vote for Republicans who want to shred the Constitution's other clauses with warrantless wiretaps (even special 'express courts' and allowing 'after the fact warrants' aren't good enough for them). And Free Speech? Don't disagree with them or you're "supporting the terrorists". Neither one of them seems to understand the Constitution is a document to be taken as a whole - you don't just cherry-pick what you like.

What's left?

[Guest]

I repeat what is a card carrying NRA member?

Did you or did you not use this as a negative "trope" and an "epithet" of hate to fellow Americans who legally bear arms?

You made the staement so what did you mean?

Come on Cashman, don't be too hard on her. You know the liberals don't give two cents about documents written many years ago protecting our rights.

[Guest]

Anger is all well and good - it can be a motivation to DO something.

But where do we go? What do we do?

VK says "don't vote for an incumbent". Fine, I can see that. But let's look at our choices.

We can vote for Democrats, who will have to raise taxes to cover their profligate spending. Or we could vote for Republicans who will have to raise taxes to cover their profligate spending (that was worse than previous Democrats but not quite as bad as current Democrats). Neither one of them seems to know the meaning of the phrase "cutting spending"

We can vote for Democrats who want to redefine free speech into "non-offensive speech" or we can vote for Republicans who want to shred the Constitution's other clauses with warrantless wiretaps (even special 'express courts' and allowing 'after the fact warrants' aren't good enough for them). And Free Speech? Don't disagree with them or you're "supporting the terrorists". Neither one of them seems to understand the Constitution is a document to be taken as a whole - you don't just cherry-pick what you like.

What's left?

Another use of the Liberal term "warrantless wiretaps" to incite hate for Bush and Republicans.

Would you use this terminology if the use of wiretaps saved a member of you family.

By the way our privacy does not trump these methods according to Obamas new procedures which most agree with. Republicans generally agree with these methods no matter whether it is Bush or Obama using them.

[Guest]

djplong, I don't believe it is a Democrat or Republican question. I think your freedoms are the answer. Your right to vote is the number one answer. We have to start on the local level and really question who we are voting into office. I personally believe in the rights of the people not the government.

I got excited watching Americans getting involved and attending town hall meetings and questioning their elected representatives. Somehow that got overtaken by extremists, unions and community organizers. The tea party protesters gave me faith and now I see it being corrupted and sabotaged.

I understand the premise behind wire-taps and such, but I have also watched in fear as it snowballs down a slippery slope of abuse.

This may be a stupid example, but I love to watch the reality police shows. I am amazed at how a person can be handcuffed and their vehicle and personal belongings searched without a search warrant and they haven't been read their rights or arrested. It is done for the safety of the police officer and the person being questioned they always say. I understand reasonable suspicion and all that. My husband laughs at me for my concern on something like this while watching Cops and says these are crack-heads and hookers.

Did you hear about the case in Pennsylvania where students were given computers to take home? A lawsuit is now alleging that the school administration "spied" on students in their homes.

http://jonathanturley.org/2010/02/20/pennsylvania-school-accused-of-equipping-computer-with-surveillance-devices-and-spying-on-students-at-home/

I don't mind going through security at airports. I actually had the magic number at Logan recently and had to undergo the more intense search. I didn't mind one bit. I'm not complaining, but somewhere we've lost common sense in the minorities pleas of political correctness.

Somewhere our compass has been misdirected and we've lost our standards.

[Guest]

djplong, I don't believe it is a Democrat or Republican question. I think your freedoms are the answer. Your right to vote is the number one answer. We have to start on the local level and really question who we are voting into office. I personally believe in the rights of the people not the government.

I got excited watching Americans getting involved and attending town hall meetings and questioning their elected representatives. Somehow that got overtaken by extremists, unions and community organizers. The tea party protesters gave me faith and now I see it being corrupted and sabotaged.

I understand the premise behind wire-taps and such, but I have also watched in fear as it snowballs down a slippery slope of abuse.

This may be a stupid example, but I love to watch the reality police shows. I am amazed at how a person can be handcuffed and their vehicle and personal belongings searched without a search warrant and they haven't been read their rights or arrested. It is done for the safety of the police officer and the person being questioned they always say. I understand reasonable suspicion and all that. My husband laughs at me for my concern on something like this while watching Cops and says these are crack-heads and hookers.

Did you hear about the case in Pennsylvania where students were given computers to take home? A lawsuit is now alleging that the school administration "spied" on students in their homes.

http://jonathanturley.org/2010/02/20/pennsylvania-school-accused-of-equipping-computer-with-surveillance-devices-and-spying-on-students-at-home/

I don't mind going through security at airports. I actually had the magic number at Logan recently and had to undergo the more intense search. I didn't mind one bit. I'm not complaining, but somewhere we've lost common sense in the minorities pleas of political correctness.

Somewhere our compass has been misdirected and we've lost our standards.

Amen!

[Guest]

Another use of the Liberal term "warrantless wiretaps" to incite hate for Bush and Republicans.

Would you use this terminology if the use of wiretaps saved a member of you family.


And what if it was YOUR INNOCENT FAMILY MEMBER who was imprisoned for 7 years or more for being a SUSPECT? What if YOU are the one who had their business assets seized without a warrant? What happens when it's YOUR ox being gored? What happens when YOU get tarred and feathered because of something an acquaintance does that you had no idea about?

This is EXACTLY what I mean about cherry-picking the Constitution I'll QUOTE it FOR you since you seem to have a hole in your memory where the ENTIRE FOURTH AMMENDMENT BELONGS:


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


There is no "unless we don't feel like issuing a warrant" in there. This is why they're no longer allowed to seize your house or boat just because a guest of yours might have had marijuana in their possession while under your roof! (Remember THAT wonderful little controversy from the 1980s?)

You complain (justifiably) about Obama trampling the Constitution to provide health care but you give a pass to THIS? Outrageous!

"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - Thomas Jefferson. [Side note - Red State Texas decided to eliminate Thomas Jefferson from the curriculum, apparently because of his anti-organized-Christianity quotes from back then]

[Guest]

And what if it was YOUR INNOCENT FAMILY MEMBER who was imprisoned for 7 years or more for being a SUSPECT? What if YOU are the one who had their business assets seized without a warrant? What happens when it's YOUR ox being gored? What happens when YOU get tarred and feathered because of something an acquaintance does that you had no idea about?

This is EXACTLY what I mean about cherry-picking the Constitution I'll QUOTE it FOR you since you seem to have a hole in your memory where the ENTIRE FOURTH AMMENDMENT BELONGS:



There is no "unless we don't feel like issuing a warrant" in there. This is why they're no longer allowed to seize your house or boat just because a guest of yours might have had marijuana in their possession while under your roof! (Remember THAT wonderful little controversy from the 1980s?)

You complain (justifiably) about Obama trampling the Constitution to provide health care but you give a pass to THIS? Outrageous!

"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - Thomas Jefferson. [Side note - Red State Texas decided to eliminate Thomas Jefferson from the curriculum, apparently because of his anti-organized-Christianity quotes from back then]

DJPLONG....I honestly dont mean this to be antagonist in anyway but reading your comment about those INNOCENT folks detained at GTMO.....this is a honest legitimate question....have any of those released by this administration be proven to be innocent ?

I know there are documented cases of folks going back to Jihad activities after being released, but wondering about the few who this administration released. We always here about INNOCENTS being held and always related to GTMO...dont know of anywhere else that happened.

Just curious if you know of any "INNOCENTS"

Thanks

[Guest]

djplong, I don't think your "Side note - Red State Texas decided to eliminate Thomas Jefferson from the curriculum, apparently because of his anti-organized-Christianity quotes from back then" is correct. The board, rightly or wrongly, decided to take Jefferson out of the "world history section devoted to great political thinkers."

Jefferson is still in the American history standards. The argument on the world history side had to do with the writings of The Enlightenment Movement not being the only influence in European uprisings at that time in history.


http://www.aolnews.com/nation/article/texas-removes-thomas-jefferson-from-teaching-standard/19397481

[Guest]

And what if it was YOUR INNOCENT FAMILY MEMBER who was imprisoned for 7 years or more for being a SUSPECT? What if YOU are the one who had their business assets seized without a warrant? What happens when it's YOUR ox being gored? What happens when YOU get tarred and feathered because of something an acquaintance does that you had no idea about?

This is EXACTLY what I mean about cherry-picking the Constitution I'll QUOTE it FOR you since you seem to have a hole in your memory where the ENTIRE FOURTH AMMENDMENT BELONGS:



There is no "unless we don't feel like issuing a warrant" in there. This is why they're no longer allowed to seize your house or boat just because a guest of yours might have had marijuana in their possession while under your roof! (Remember THAT wonderful little controversy from the 1980s?)

You complain (justifiably) about Obama trampling the Constitution to provide health care but you give a pass to THIS? Outrageous!

"A society that will trade a little liberty for a little order will lose both and deserve neither" - Thomas Jefferson. [Side note - Red State Texas decided to eliminate Thomas Jefferson from the curriculum, apparently because of his anti-organized-Christianity quotes from back then]

If this is your response to me I am totally lost. Are you sure you read my post. I doubt it very much so lets forget it.

[Guest]

The funny thing about the supposed "n-word calling" that not one of the hundreds of cell phone videos or dozens of media cameras were able to record, and alleged intentional "spitting incident" is that I would bet my last dollar, if Obama will leave me that one dollar, that those congressmen walking through a crowd of protesters were looking to be assaulted to blacken the eyes of the "tea party" with the video of this wished for assault playing over and over and over again ala Rodney King. Well guess what? It didn't happen. All we have is an image of a black congressman pointing and yelling into the crowd; actually intentionally trying to escalate the tensions and got nothing for his attempt to inflame the crowd but his word that someone called him a bad name.
Imagine, if you will, Bush or his entourage trying to walk through the crowd at the G-8 summit and tell me if you think those rioting, molotov throwing, rock throwing crowd of progressive leftists would have only called him a bad name. The hypocrisy of the left is laughable.

[Guest]

This may be a stupid example, but I love to watch the reality police shows. I am amazed at how a person can be handcuffed and their vehicle and personal belongings searched without a search warrant and they haven't been read their rights or arrested. It is done for the safety of the police officer and the person being questioned they always say. I understand reasonable suspicion and all that. My husband laughs at me for my concern on something like this while watching Cops and says these are crack-heads and hookers.

Did you hear about the case in Pennsylvania where students were given computers to take home? A lawsuit is now alleging that the school administration "spied" on students in their homes.

...

I don't mind going through security at airports. I actually had the magic number at Logan recently and had to undergo the more intense search. I didn't mind one bit. I'm not complaining, but somewhere we've lost common sense in the minorities pleas of political correctness.


I'll take these in order.

Yeah, I used to watch COPS every week. But read that 4th Ammendment again. "unreasonable" search and seizure. "Probable cause". The courts have defined this to be anything that is in plain sight, for starters. And if you're arresting someone, you're allowed to go through their pockets. But if you want to go into their house, unless you have reason to believe life and limb is in danger or a felony is being committed, you need a warrant. Again, reasonable definitions. What galled me about the 'warrantless wiretaps' was that the argument was "what if we don't have time to get a warrant" - ignoring the fact that FISA courts were set up for EXACTLY that reason - so you COULD get a warrant after the fact. That bends, but doesn't quite (IMO) break the 4th Ammendment.

Yes, I heard about the PA case. I'm guessing some dork-witted I.T. dipstick thought it would be cool to see what he or she could do - and got caught. If this turns out to be what it seems, I want to see the people responsible prosecuted. ...and if it was in a kid's bedroom, throw some child pornography charges at them. Put the fear of the courts into ANYONE that thinks they can get away with crap like that.

As far as airport security.. Well, I wouldn't mind it so much if it actually was effective. I mean, how far have we come from Richard Reid to last Christmas? Once again a terrorist smuggled something on a plane, tried to ignite it and was subdued BY THE PASSENGERS. Once again we find that relying solely on technology is NOT the answer. Once again, it's HUMAN BEINGS that make the difference. But, strangely enough, in spite of these proofs, we still have long security lines that move at a glacial pace and we still have to take our shoes off.

It's THEATER, not security.

[Guest]

DJPLONG....I honestly dont mean this to be antagonist in anyway but reading your comment about those INNOCENT folks detained at GTMO.....this is a honest legitimate question....have any of those released by this administration be proven to be innocent ?

I know there are documented cases of folks going back to Jihad activities after being released, but wondering about the few who this administration released. We always here about INNOCENTS being held and always related to GTMO...dont know of anywhere else that happened.

Just curious if you know of any "INNOCENTS"


Hey, I ask honest questions that sound antagonistic all the time - that's why I try to preface them.

But to answer your question, a few seconds with Google found this:

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/03/19/guantanamo-detainee-innocent.html


"There are still innocent people there," Republican Lawrence B. Wilkerson, former chief of staff to then-secretary of state Colin Powell, told the Associated Press. "Some have been there six or seven years."

[Guest]

Hey, I ask honest questions that sound antagonistic all the time - that's why I try to preface them.

But to answer your question, a few seconds with Google found this:

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/03/19/guantanamo-detainee-innocent.html

Thanks for the link to that article !!!

I understand what he says totally, but still believe that the constant reference to GTMO and the innocent is a bit over done. I am sure that my political bias is shown there, but IF we are in a war...better to do what they did..and be careful in undoing it !

[Guest]

Yes people did say Bush was a Nazi and many people on this site call Obama a socialist. Insults from the left and right. Neither side was or is correct.

But spitting on people, hurling the N word or F word at Congressmen is just plain wrong whoever does it right or left. The threat of gun violence is uncalled for and even the Tea Party has condemed the practice.

I was very upset at many things that Bush and Company did in the 8 years they were in power...but not once did I reach for my gun. Oh wait a minute I don't own a gun.

Maybe you should read this:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/04/how_quickly_spread_the_tea_par.html

[Guest]

Maybe you should read this:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/04/how_quickly_spread_the_tea_par.html

Another good post Donna, and not just because it reenforces my earlier deductive post, which no one tried to dispute. This was a deliberate attempt by the progressive libs to "Rodney King" the Tea Party movement and it didn't work because we are not them

[Guest]

Another good post Donna, and not just because it reenforces my earlier deductive post, which no one tried to dispute. This was a deliberate attempt by the progressive libs to "Rodney King" the Tea Party movement and it didn't work because we are not them

Thanks Richie,

The Tea Party is not going away. We'll be at the polls in November, much to the Lamestream Media's chagrin.

[Guest]

It would be interesting to hear what COLGAL and others who are quick to come on here and preach the hate think about this.....

"After 14 months of committing 100% to health care reform, the day after the signing of the Health Care bill was to mark the Democratic Party’s new primary concern: destroy the uprising, annihilate by all means necessary, the Tea Party movement.

The first sign that a plan was in place was the ham-fisted, high-camp posturing of the most controversial members of the Democratic caucus walking through the peaceful but animated “Tea Party” demonstrators on Capitol Hill. There is no reason for these elected officials to walk above ground through the media circus amid their ideological foes. The natural route is the tunnels between the House office buildings and the Capitol. By crafting a highly symbolic walk of the Congressional Black Caucus through the majority white crowd, the Democratic Party was looking to provoke a negative reaction. They didn’t get it. So they made it up.

This expose by Andrew Breitbart is complete with videos and FACTS to dispel the incident first exposed on here by COLGAL ...

This is an example of things that DO NOT HAPPEN being reported by a media that does not even check facts. And then, as this has been disproved, you never hear another word from anybody...no apologies...no statements...just silence.

http://bigjournalism.com/abreitbart/2010/04/02/barack-obamas-helter-skelter-insane-clown-posse-alinsky-planes-to-deconstruct-america/

[Guest]

Thanks Richie,

The Tea Party is not going away. We'll be at the polls in November, much to the Lamestream Media's chagrin.

Donna, I don't mean this as an insult. But WHAT can POSSIBLY - and by that I mean *realistically* happen in November?

Either NOTHING happens and "The Socialists" stay in power.

Otherwise, they get voted out and "The Gestapo" goes in. (And an incompetent Gestapo at that - 8 years and they still can't stop terrorists from getting on planes, even when they're warned in advance - this is the "Hogan's Heroes" style Gestapo).

How far are we from "Your papers, please?". And they justify it all with so-called 'Security' that is nothing more than theater. At this rate, in a few years, we'll all have to board planes naked.

Neither one of the parties seem to give a damn about Americans. It's all in what they can pitch to buy votes - either by promising benefits (Democrats) or scaring them (Republicans). The people in power are tribal - they belong to their tribe first ('R' or 'D') and their country comes in somewhere behind that, family and maybe the prostitute-du-jour.

I'm more than a little sympathetic towards the Tea Party's groundswell of anger (though some radicals cross the line, IMO). I just don't see what good it's going to do. At best we'd be jumping out of the fire and back into the frying pan.

I'm convinced that we need a third party rising from the ashes of the existing two. One that can rein in the government growth while protecting the freedoms that were supposed to be guaranteed by the Constitution. Not GIVEN by the Constitution (so that some legislooter could take them away), PROTECTED by it.

[Guest]

been presented as either left or right in preference.
It has consistently been presented as re-elect no one!!!!

So to categorize it as either one or the other (nice reference calling the opposition "gestapo"....doesn't tip your hand too much as to your leaning...eh?).

The objective: SEND A MESSAGE TO WASHINGTON......

I feel very fortunate that my sphere of knowledge/information is not limited ONLY to the Bush years and the last 14 months. Must be a real handicap believing nothing happened prior to that very miniscule period in history.

Vote for no incumbent IS NOT a partisan endeavor! And some will not be able to deal with that....eh?

btk

[Guest]

been presented as either left or right in preference.
It has consistently been presented as re-elect no one!!!!

So to categorize it as either one or the other (nice reference calling the opposition "gestapo"....doesn't tip your hand too much as to your leaning...eh?).

The objective: SEND A MESSAGE TO WASHINGTON......

I feel very fortunate that my sphere of knowledge/information is not limited ONLY to the Bush years and the last 14 months. Must be a real handicap believing nothing happened prior to that very miniscule period in history.

Vote for no incumbent IS NOT a partisan endeavor! And some will not be able to deal with that....eh?

btk

I agree. I would much prefer to think back pre-Bush and after Carter period when a conservative was a conservative and RINO's were few and far between.

[Guest]

Donna, I don't mean this as an insult. But WHAT can POSSIBLY - and by that I mean *realistically* happen in November?

Either NOTHING happens and "The Socialists" stay in power.

Otherwise, they get voted out and "The Gestapo" goes in. (And an incompetent Gestapo at that - 8 years and they still can't stop terrorists from getting on planes, even when they're warned in advance - this is the "Hogan's Heroes" style Gestapo).

How far are we from "Your papers, please?". And they justify it all with so-called 'Security' that is nothing more than theater. At this rate, in a few years, we'll all have to board planes naked.

Neither one of the parties seem to give a damn about Americans. It's all in what they can pitch to buy votes - either by promising benefits (Democrats) or scaring them (Republicans). The people in power are tribal - they belong to their tribe first ('R' or 'D') and their country comes in somewhere behind that, family and maybe the prostitute-du-jour.

I'm more than a little sympathetic towards the Tea Party's groundswell of anger (though some radicals cross the line, IMO). I just don't see what good it's going to do. At best we'd be jumping out of the fire and back into the frying pan.

I'm convinced that we need a third party rising from the ashes of the existing two. One that can rein in the government growth while protecting the freedoms that were supposed to be guaranteed by the Constitution. Not GIVEN by the Constitution (so that some legislooter could take them away), PROTECTED by it.

This hate speach gets you nowhere.

[Guest]

The unruly hate-filled liberals attack republican building.


http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/04/breaking-another-gop-office-attacked-in-ohio-smashed-windows/

[Guest]

So to categorize it as either one or the other (nice reference calling the opposition "gestapo"....doesn't tip your hand too much as to your leaning...eh?).


When it comes to social issues, I "lean left" according to how people like to pdgeonhole me. I believe in freedoms the way they were outlined in the Constitution.

*Today's* Republican seems to believe in "well, if you're not doing anything wrong, you don't need privacy".

When it comes to fiscal issues, I lean the other way. I had an friend who had an artist over and the artist was griping about how he wished the government would "support the arts" more and that art was very important and should be publicly funded. I said words to the effect of "then get a patron". He was puzzled. I said "Look, what if I decide to sit on my ass and draw stick figures - claim it's 'minimalist art' and demand a government stiped". The look on his face clearly said that he'd never thought of that possibility. He didn't understand that his passion (art) if put into law would bring people in to abuse the system.

And you're right. I shouldn't have used the word "Gestapo". I should have found something a little milder than "KGB".

Cashman: So my bit of frustrated ranting is "hate speech"? Yet Tea Partiers putting a Hitler moustache on an Obama portrait is ok? Can you tell me what your definition of "hate speech" is, then? Or am I *completely* missing the humor in a remark? (Though, in the end, you're right about one thing - it's not going to solve anything other than venting for a brief time)

[Guest]

I'm just glad that people are starting to pay attention to what is going on with this administration. And most only have scraped the surface.

As far as the Tea Party people, God bless them. I have observed many of their gatherings in several States. They are orderly, clean up the mess, and protest peacefully. I have also noticed 'set-ups' by people of another persuasion accusing Tea Parties of bad behavior, physically and verbally. That's a load of crappola (as my grandfather used to say).

We need to take this country back and take it back to the Constitution. The government is responsible for our protection militarily -- NOT from everything we eat to how much water is in the toilet bowl.

If anyone doesn't agree with me, I'm fine with that. But I will exercise my rights and help to get Conservatives to run and get elected, starting with November 2010.

If we don't get this Congress back and rid ourselves of this president in 2012, there is truly no hope. I am glad that I won't live long enough to see all of this play out that Obama has planned, but I am very saddened that my children will not have the country that I grew up in or the freedoms and opportunities I had.

[Guest]

Hey Bucco talk about things that didn't happen and no apology how about James O'Keefe and his edited garbage being reported as factual on his "expose" of ACORN. And climategate...no apologies for that even though it has now been reported that no one lied. Stop the sanctimonious nonsense please.

[Guest]

waynet, please post links to things you say here to prove your point. No offense, but it is silly to argue against hollow echos of left wing rhetoric. Please don't be a mindless parrot. Give us something with substance that we can consider to change our opinions. I have yet to see anything to dispel the charges against ACORN or prove global warming. Just back up your bull....ish remarks. Respectfully, B.K.

[Guest]

Hey Bucco talk about things that didn't happen and no apology how about James O'Keefe and his edited garbage being reported as factual on his "expose" of ACORN. And climategate...no apologies for that even though it has now been reported that no one lied. Stop the sanctimonious nonsense please.

What kind of parallel universe to you inhabit? Acorn was guilty and scientists lied. But if you have any credible links. Even the leftists have disputed your allegations.

[Guest]

Hey Bucco talk about things that didn't happen and no apology how about James O'Keefe and his edited garbage being reported as factual on his "expose" of ACORN. And climategate...no apologies for that even though it has now been reported that no one lied. Stop the sanctimonious nonsense please.

Why Waynet do you whine when you are wasting time with wobbly weak unsupported willy nilly unwisdoms.

[Guest]

What kind of parallel universe to you inhabit? Acorn was guilty and scientists lied. But if you have any credible links. Even the leftists have disputed your allegations.

What other explanation?

[Guest]

Hey Bucco talk about things that didn't happen and no apology how about James O'Keefe and his edited garbage being reported as factual on his "expose" of ACORN. And climategate...no apologies for that even though it has now been reported that no one lied. Stop the sanctimonious nonsense please.

1. Please supply a link to substantiate your comments.

2. Please point out where anything I posted was "nonsense" and not true.


Thank you

[Guest]

http://coloradoindependent.com/48555/the-acorn-scandal-then-and-nowhttp://coloradoindependent.com/48555/the-acorn-scandal-then-and-nowhttp://coloradoindependent.com/48555/the-acorn-scandal-then-and-now

[Guest]

http://coloradoindependent.com/48555/the-acorn-scandal-then-and-nowhttp://coloradoindependent.com/48555/the-acorn-scandal-then-and-nowhttp://coloradoindependent.com/48555/the-acorn-scandal-then-and-now

I suppose I should say I am sorry that this man edited the film to suit his purposes. Now explain what we did see...edited ? You did say you wanted an apology, right ?

And, please explain what that situation has to do with the original thread subject matter. If you wish to begin a thread on what each party has done over the years, it will be a long one.

You TOTALLY miss the point in your attempt to be PARTY LOYAL !

[Guest]

Neither report says the interviews on the ACORN undercover operation tapes didn't happen or were false. The Brooklyn DA investigated three ACORN employees who were taped.

The report by House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, Jr. (D-Mich.), which was requested by House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, (imagine that) found no instances of ACORN illegally registering individuals to vote, no instances where ACORN violated the terms of federal funding in the last five years, and:

"Concerning recent "sting" operations relating to ACORN, although state laws vary, two relevant states, Maryland and California, "appear to ban private recording of face to face conversations absent the consent of all the participants." Memorandum from the Congressional Research Service to the House Judiciary, "Allegations of Recording Conversations with Various ACORN Affiliated Individuals without Their Consent" (October 9, 2009), at 1."

http://judiciary.house.gov/news/091222.html

"....Congressional Research Service in December, where ACORN’s actions were determined to be less legally objectionable than the actions of O’Keefe and Giles, who likely violated laws in two states banning surreptitious face to face recording."

http://coloradoindependent.com/48555/the-acorn-scandal-then-and-now

"Less legally objectionable..." The legal objectionable thing that the undercover operations by OKeefe and Giles were taping without consent of all parties in two states."

ACORN Statement by Brooklyn DA Charles Hynes"

Brooklyn, March 1, 2010 - Kings County District Attorney Charles J. Hynes today released the following statement:

“On September 15, 2009, my office began an investigation into possible criminality on the part of three ACORN employees. The three had been secretly videotaped by two people posing as a pimp and prostitute, who came to ACORN’S Brooklyn office, seeking advice about how to purchase a house with money generated by their ‘business.’ The ‘couple’ later made the recording public. That investigation is now concluded and no criminality has been found.”

http://www.brooklynda.org/



Nothing I read says the tapes were false and the Congressional review doesn't mention anything about editing by OKeefe.

[Guest]

On the same site you provided previously waynet, The Colorado Independent, I saw this article about the recent California Attorney General's report on the ACORN investigation by OKeefe. The Colorado Indepentent's version is a little misleading. Their article emphasis the misdeads of OKeefe and Giles.


I looked up the actual report on the California AG's website. It is very different than what the Colorado Independent site says.

According to the first three paragraphs of the California AG's press release: "California Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today released a report, including newly obtained videotapes, that shows some members of the community organizing group ACORN engaged in "highly inappropriate behavior," but committed no violation of criminal laws.

"Brown's report also uncovered "likely violations" of state law, including dumping 500 pages of confidential records into a dumpster, failure to file a 2007 tax return, and four instances of possible voter registration fraud by ACORN in San Diego in connection with the 2008 election, as well as other irregularities in the group's California operations. These irregularities have been referred to the appropriate authorities.

"A few ACORN members exhibited terrible judgment and highly inappropriate behavior in videotapes obtained in the investigation," Brown said. "But they didn't commit prosecutable crimes in California."

http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1888

No offense, but consider the source when using The Colorado Independent as a source. Don't take it at face value. Use it as a springboard to study the subjects they cover and look to other sources as well. It is a spinoff of the controversial Independent Media Center who has "anti-capitalist views." It is basically Internet bloggers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Independent_Media_Center