TakeAStepBack
Gold Member
- Mar 29, 2011
- 13,935
- 1,742
The right to privacy, for one example. Spying on US citizens. Indefinite detention. Assassination.
Should i go on?
Should i go on?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You mean like in Libya?
The hypocrisy knows no boundaries.
Or how about Egypt?
The right to privacy, for one example. Spying on US citizens. Indefinite detention. Assassination.
Should i go on?
The right to privacy, for one example. Spying on US citizens. Indefinite detention. Assassination.
Should i go on?
Thank heavens for the patriot act and AUMF, right?
Which conservative wants those repealed?
Links?
I see you like moving the goal posts. You're as stupid as you are hypocritical, Shallow. If I didn't know better, i'd think you were a high school kid with big socialist dreams.
The right to privacy, for one example. Spying on US citizens. Indefinite detention. Assassination.
Should i go on?
Thank heavens for the patriot act and AUMF, right?
Which conservative wants those repealed?
Links?
I thought the liberals were the ones who were for freedom? Why are your liberals using these conservative(and liberal) policies?
Is this just you looking to obfuscate away from reality?
And the NDAA 2012 was Obama's policy. It's ALL his, fella. But spin around, click your heels...there is no place like the Dem plantation.
Thank heavens for the patriot act and AUMF, right?
Which conservative wants those repealed?
Links?
I thought the liberals were the ones who were for freedom? Why are your liberals using these conservative(and liberal) policies?
Is this just you looking to obfuscate away from reality?
And the NDAA 2012 was Obama's policy. It's ALL his, fella. But spin around, click your heels...there is no place like the Dem plantation.
The Patriot Act and the AUMF were authored by conservatives. And it's conservatives constantly braying about liberals being "weak" on defense. You folks on one hand say the President is "weak" but call him a dictator when he uses these tools to stop terrorists. What exactly do you think should happen? An executive order to repeal both?
And that little bit about indefinite detention in the NDAA was AUTHORED by CONSERVATIVES as a political poison pill.
Sucks it didn't work, right?
Was the 16 year old boy from Denver a terrorist?
NDAA 2012 has Obama;'s signature on it. Sorry, dude. You do not get to hypocrite your way around that. It's no different than democrats signing on yea for shit that people like you claim they were not in favor of. It's nonsense partisan hackery bullshit.
I thought the liberals were the ones who were for freedom? Why are your liberals using these conservative(and liberal) policies?
Is this just you looking to obfuscate away from reality?
And the NDAA 2012 was Obama's policy. It's ALL his, fella. But spin around, click your heels...there is no place like the Dem plantation.
The Patriot Act and the AUMF were authored by conservatives. And it's conservatives constantly braying about liberals being "weak" on defense. You folks on one hand say the President is "weak" but call him a dictator when he uses these tools to stop terrorists. What exactly do you think should happen? An executive order to repeal both?
And that little bit about indefinite detention in the NDAA was AUTHORED by CONSERVATIVES as a political poison pill.
Sucks it didn't work, right?
So, why do liberals keep using and expanding these conservative policies, Shallow? Riddle me that, you hypocritical, hyper-partisan hack.
You mean like in Libya?
The hypocrisy knows no boundaries.
Or how about Egypt?
You're a fan of Gaddafi, I see.
A man who planned and financed the murder of over 100 people, including Americans.
He should have taken a dirt nap a long time ago.
And Egypt got rid of their own leader. You'd have more of a point if you pointed out that Obama threatened to cut funding for the military if they did not get rid of the Muslim Brotherhood. But even then? Egypt's been on our dime for a long time. It was part of the Peace plan that has kept Egypt from attacking Israel.
I know EXACTLY what installed means. Apparently it's you that's having trouble with linguistics.
When a foreign government chooses the leader of a nation, and helps that leader into power, that is INSTALLING a leader. Pinochet did not come to power by the will of the people. He came to power by forces beyond Chile.
The United States has always had a complex relationship with it's expansionism. It declared some time ago that all of the Americas belong to Americans. And it could do that because of it's powerful military and economic influence. But that really didn't sit well with many Americans who favor the Constitution and a "limited" role in the world. There are Americans that want to lead by example and not force. The back and forth between Empire loving Conservatives and Freedom loving Liberals is one that goes beyond our borders.
The Soviet Union broke up some time ago. It wasn't cheap. The United States had to cushion the blow of the break up by spending billions. And for the most part this spending benefitted gangsters and ex-KGB. One of which who now heads the country. But they were reigned in by pesky treaties and agreements. Thanks to the Bush Doctrine, which says implicitly, that no powerful nation should ever be constrained by such doctrine, Putin now is engaging in reclaiming to his country what was lost when sane men sat down and agreed that the madness should end.
Bush, left a huge mess at the end of his presidency. And all of his domestic and foreign policies were warned against time and time again. These warnings were ignored or worse called "Unamerican". "You are with us, or you are with the Terrorists" Bush proclaimed about dissent.
Now, the chickens have come home to roost. And what do conservatives do? Apologize?
Naw.
They cheer the bad guys and blame Liberals.
I know EXACTLY what installed means. Apparently it's you that's having trouble with linguistics.
When a foreign government chooses the leader of a nation, and helps that leader into power, that is INSTALLING a leader. Pinochet did not come to power by the will of the people. He came to power by forces beyond Chile.
Which is what we did not do. Yes, we undermined the government, no we did not select the new leader. And you haven't produced any evidence that we did. You just keep producing more evidence of the point not in contention, which is our opposition to the Marxist government.
You mean like in Libya?
The hypocrisy knows no boundaries.
Or how about Egypt?
You're a fan of Gaddafi, I see.
A man who planned and financed the murder of over 100 people, including Americans.
He should have taken a dirt nap a long time ago.
And Egypt got rid of their own leader. You'd have more of a point if you pointed out that Obama threatened to cut funding for the military if they did not get rid of the Muslim Brotherhood. But even then? Egypt's been on our dime for a long time. It was part of the Peace plan that has kept Egypt from attacking Israel.
Oh Sallow, with all due respect....bite me.
Morsi was Obama's bitch. AND many in the west were buying into the MB as being "just a secular organization". Egyptians finally wised up as to why the MB had been banned before. Oh and btw the MB is banned in many ME countries.
Obama warns Egypt against arbitrary arrests during Situation Room summit
By Dave Boyer
The Washington Times
Thursday, July 4, 2013
As a new interim president of Egypt was sworn in Thursday, President Obama met with his national security team at the White House to review the situation and to warn Egypts interim government away from retaliation against its former Muslim Brotherhood leaders.
Obama warns Egypt against arbitrary arrests during Situation Room summit - Washington Times
Obama asks Republican Senators McCain, Graham to visit Egypt
By Patricia Zengerle
WASHINGTON Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:23pm EDT
Obama asks Republican Senators McCain, Graham to visit Egypt | Reuters
The United States has always had a complex relationship with it's expansionism. It declared some time ago that all of the Americas belong to Americans. And it could do that because of it's powerful military and economic influence. But that really didn't sit well with many Americans who favor the Constitution and a "limited" role in the world. There are Americans that want to lead by example and not force. The back and forth between Empire loving Conservatives and Freedom loving Liberals is one that goes beyond our borders.
The Soviet Union broke up some time ago. It wasn't cheap. The United States had to cushion the blow of the break up by spending billions. And for the most part this spending benefitted gangsters and ex-KGB. One of which who now heads the country. But they were reigned in by pesky treaties and agreements. Thanks to the Bush Doctrine, which says implicitly, that no powerful nation should ever be constrained by such doctrine, Putin now is engaging in reclaiming to his country what was lost when sane men sat down and agreed that the madness should end.
Bush, left a huge mess at the end of his presidency. And all of his domestic and foreign policies were warned against time and time again. These warnings were ignored or worse called "Unamerican". "You are with us, or you are with the Terrorists" Bush proclaimed about dissent.
Now, the chickens have come home to roost. And what do conservatives do? Apologize?
Naw.
They cheer the bad guys and blame Liberals.
Bush indeed left a mess, two illegal wars in particular.
I know EXACTLY what installed means. Apparently it's you that's having trouble with linguistics.
When a foreign government chooses the leader of a nation, and helps that leader into power, that is INSTALLING a leader. Pinochet did not come to power by the will of the people. He came to power by forces beyond Chile.
Which is what we did not do. Yes, we undermined the government, no we did not select the new leader. And you haven't produced any evidence that we did. You just keep producing more evidence of the point not in contention, which is our opposition to the Marxist government.
This is one of those blue sky arguments.
Where you are questioning "blue".
There's really nothing to discuss, then.
We don't agree on the language.
You're a fan of Gaddafi, I see.
A man who planned and financed the murder of over 100 people, including Americans.
He should have taken a dirt nap a long time ago.
And Egypt got rid of their own leader. You'd have more of a point if you pointed out that Obama threatened to cut funding for the military if they did not get rid of the Muslim Brotherhood. But even then? Egypt's been on our dime for a long time. It was part of the Peace plan that has kept Egypt from attacking Israel.
Oh Sallow, with all due respect....bite me.
Morsi was Obama's bitch. AND many in the west were buying into the MB as being "just a secular organization". Egyptians finally wised up as to why the MB had been banned before. Oh and btw the MB is banned in many ME countries.
Obama warns Egypt against arbitrary arrests during Situation Room summit
By Dave Boyer
The Washington Times
Thursday, July 4, 2013
As a new interim president of Egypt was sworn in Thursday, President Obama met with his national security team at the White House to review the situation and to warn Egypts interim government away from retaliation against its former Muslim Brotherhood leaders.
Obama warns Egypt against arbitrary arrests during Situation Room summit - Washington Times
Obama asks Republican Senators McCain, Graham to visit Egypt
By Patricia Zengerle
WASHINGTON Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:23pm EDT
Obama asks Republican Senators McCain, Graham to visit Egypt | Reuters
Morsi was not the desired outcome of the Obama administration.
If the Muslim brotherhood, had been the desired outcome..they would still be in power.