Presidents speech tonight

[Votto]

The only thing I rejected from President Obama speech was his request to Congress to pass a law to prevent people on a No-Fly list not to be able to obtain a firearm because their name is on a government list that is faulty.

A list created by the government that does not prove that the person is a convicted criminal should not be used to deny someone Constitutional Right, and again the list is faulty and has been shown to be incorrect in the past.

That is a very weak argument because there is a simple mechanism already in place to get your name removed from the list if you are on it in error.

It is a weak argument to use a list like that to deny someone their Constitutional Right. I should not have to worry some Government Bureaucrat put my name on a list mistakenly which lead to the government denying me my constitutional right.

Also it is not a easy task to remove your name from the list, and the list is flawed as can be.

So as you write it is a weak argument not to support such laws the fact remains a list like that can become a political tool to prevent individuals from their Constitutional Rights, and I am not signing on such nonsense.

Also most mass shooters if not all of them were not on the No-Fly list, so how would have a law prevent them from obtaining a firearm?

I'm glad you defend Constitutional rights for terrorists, but what about undocumented immigrants?

Are you kidding me?

Are you going to claim everyone that is on the No-Fly list are terrorists including those that were mistakenly put on it in the past like Ted Kennedy the former Senator?

Also illegals immigrants are protected by certain laws within our border but are still not citizens of this country where as individuals that are citizens should not have their rights denied because of some faulty list.

The No-Fly list is faulty, and has been proven faulty many times in the past, and you want a law that will revoke a individual Constitutional Right based on a faulty list?

Also your switch to illegals is just typical nonsense from those that want to change the subject matter to something else when they realize their support of a law based on a faulty list is beyond stupid!

You have to understand, Progs think illegals are US citizens. Hillary won't even call them illegals anymore.

After all, Obama signed an Executive Order to protect them, even though in full defiance of the laws on the books, but I digress.

 

[edthecynic]

"They don’t have a lot of margin for error, and that has national security implications. When people are hungry, when people are displaced, when there are a lot of young people, particularly young men, who are drifting without prospects for the future, the fertility of the soil for terrorism ends up being significant," Obama said, "and it can have an impact on us."

He also said that climate change can lead to wars by fostering conflict over resources

He was citing a report by the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as you well know.

http://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-re...-climate-change-immediate-threat-could-277155

A report released Monday indicates the Department of Defense has dramatically shifted its views towards climate change, and has already begun to treat the phenomenon as a significant threat to national security. Climate change, the Pentagon writes, requires immediate action on the part of the U.S. Military.

The report is a “roadmap” of the Department’s future needs and actions to effectively respond to climate change, including anticipating that climate change may require more frequent military intervention within the country to respond to natural disasters, as well as internationally to respond to “extremist ideologies” that may arise in regions where governments are destabilized due to climate-related stressors.

“The impacts of climate change may cause instability in other countries by impairing access to food and water, damaging infrastructure, spreading disease, uprooting and displacing large numbers of people, compelling mass migration, interrupting commercial activity, or restricting electricity availability,” the Pentagon writes. “These developments could undermine already-fragile governments that are unable to respond effectively or challenge currently-stable governments, as well as increasing competition and tension between countries vying for limited resources. These gaps in governance can create an avenue for extremist ideologies and conditions that foster terrorism.”

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

The only thing I rejected from President Obama speech was his request to Congress to pass a law to prevent people on a No-Fly list not to be able to obtain a firearm because their name is on a government list that is faulty.

A list created by the government that does not prove that the person is a convicted criminal should not be used to deny someone Constitutional Right, and again the list is faulty and has been shown to be incorrect in the past.

That is a very weak argument because there is a simple mechanism already in place to get your name removed from the list if you are on it in error.

It is a weak argument to use a list like that to deny someone their Constitutional Right. I should not have to worry some Government Bureaucrat put my name on a list mistakenly which lead to the government denying me my constitutional right.

Also it is not a easy task to remove your name from the list, and the list is flawed as can be.

So as you write it is a weak argument not to support such laws the fact remains a list like that can become a political tool to prevent individuals from their Constitutional Rights, and I am not signing on such nonsense.

Also most mass shooters if not all of them were not on the No-Fly list, so how would have a law prevent them from obtaining a firearm?

I'm glad you defend Constitutional rights for terrorists, but what about undocumented immigrants?

Are you kidding me?

Are you going to claim everyone that is on the No-Fly list are terrorists including those that were mistakenly put on it in the past like Ted Kennedy the former Senator?

Also illegals immigrants are protected by certain laws within our border but are still not citizens of this country where as individuals that are citizens should not have their rights denied because of some faulty list.

The No-Fly list is faulty, and has been proven faulty many times in the past, and you want a law that will revoke a individual Constitutional Right based on a faulty list?

Also your switch to illegals is just typical nonsense from those that want to change the subject matter to something else when they realize their support of a law based on a faulty list is beyond stupid!

You have to understand, Progs think illegals are US citizens. Hillary won't even call them illegals anymore.

After all, Obama signed an Executive Order to protect them, even though in full defiance of the laws on the books, but I digress.

I am actually more Liberal minded than Conservative and full know how my side thinks. I disagree with the notion that passing a law that will prevent those on a No-Fly list buying a firearm will prevent a future terrorist attack within our border and the evidence has shown most if not all mass shooters since the start of the list have not been on that list.

The No-Fly list is faulty, and anyone writing I am protecting a terrorist right is beyond stupid because all I am doing is protecting the right of the U.S. Citizen from being put on a list by a Government Official that might use the list as a political agenda to silent those that are not on the same side of the President at that moment.

 

[edthecynic]

The only thing I rejected from President Obama speech was his request to Congress to pass a law to prevent people on a No-Fly list not to be able to obtain a firearm because their name is on a government list that is faulty.

A list created by the government that does not prove that the person is a convicted criminal should not be used to deny someone Constitutional Right, and again the list is faulty and has been shown to be incorrect in the past.

That is a very weak argument because there is a simple mechanism already in place to get your name removed from the list if you are on it in error.

It is a weak argument to use a list like that to deny someone their Constitutional Right. I should not have to worry some Government Bureaucrat put my name on a list mistakenly which lead to the government denying me my constitutional right.

Also it is not a easy task to remove your name from the list, and the list is flawed as can be.

So as you write it is a weak argument not to support such laws the fact remains a list like that can become a political tool to prevent individuals from their Constitutional Rights, and I am not signing on such nonsense.

Also most mass shooters if not all of them were not on the No-Fly list, so how would have a law prevent them from obtaining a firearm?

I'm glad you defend Constitutional rights for terrorists, but what about undocumented immigrants?

What rights do undocumented immigrants have under the Constitution?

What rights do terrorists have under the Constitution? Why does the Right, the NRA and the GOP want to bestow 2nd amendment rights on terrorists?

 

[Votto]

"They don’t have a lot of margin for error, and that has national security implications. When people are hungry, when people are displaced, when there are a lot of young people, particularly young men, who are drifting without prospects for the future, the fertility of the soil for terrorism ends up being significant," Obama said, "and it can have an impact on us."

He also said that climate change can lead to wars by fostering conflict over resources

He was citing a report by the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as you well know.

http://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-re...-climate-change-immediate-threat-could-277155

A report released Monday indicates the Department of Defense has dramatically shifted its views towards climate change, and has already begun to treat the phenomenon as a significant threat to national security. Climate change, the Pentagon writes, requires immediate action on the part of the U.S. Military.

The report is a “roadmap” of the Department’s future needs and actions to effectively respond to climate change, including anticipating that climate change may require more frequent military intervention within the country to respond to natural disasters, as well as internationally to respond to “extremist ideologies” that may arise in regions where governments are destabilized due to climate-related stressors.

“The impacts of climate change may cause instability in other countries by impairing access to food and water, damaging infrastructure, spreading disease, uprooting and displacing large numbers of people, compelling mass migration, interrupting commercial activity, or restricting electricity availability,” the Pentagon writes. “These developments could undermine already-fragile governments that are unable to respond effectively or challenge currently-stable governments, as well as increasing competition and tension between countries vying for limited resources. These gaps in governance can create an avenue for extremist ideologies and conditions that foster terrorism.”

As I said, "W" was told by intelligence that Iraq had WMD's. As we both know, this was also a lie

Now as for terrorism, the countries with the worst terrorism are all heavily Islamic, and no, not all have droughts.

 

[Kosh]

"They don’t have a lot of margin for error, and that has national security implications. When people are hungry, when people are displaced, when there are a lot of young people, particularly young men, who are drifting without prospects for the future, the fertility of the soil for terrorism ends up being significant," Obama said, "and it can have an impact on us."

He also said that climate change can lead to wars by fostering conflict over resources

He was citing a report by the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as you well know.

http://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-re...-climate-change-immediate-threat-could-277155

A report released Monday indicates the Department of Defense has dramatically shifted its views towards climate change, and has already begun to treat the phenomenon as a significant threat to national security. Climate change, the Pentagon writes, requires immediate action on the part of the U.S. Military.

The report is a “roadmap” of the Department’s future needs and actions to effectively respond to climate change, including anticipating that climate change may require more frequent military intervention within the country to respond to natural disasters, as well as internationally to respond to “extremist ideologies” that may arise in regions where governments are destabilized due to climate-related stressors.

“The impacts of climate change may cause instability in other countries by impairing access to food and water, damaging infrastructure, spreading disease, uprooting and displacing large numbers of people, compelling mass migration, interrupting commercial activity, or restricting electricity availability,” the Pentagon writes. “These developments could undermine already-fragile governments that are unable to respond effectively or challenge currently-stable governments, as well as increasing competition and tension between countries vying for limited resources. These gaps in governance can create an avenue for extremist ideologies and conditions that foster terrorism.”

And you just proven the OP with your post..

You should feel proud far left drone!

 

[Votto]

"They don’t have a lot of margin for error, and that has national security implications. When people are hungry, when people are displaced, when there are a lot of young people, particularly young men, who are drifting without prospects for the future, the fertility of the soil for terrorism ends up being significant," Obama said, "and it can have an impact on us."

He also said that climate change can lead to wars by fostering conflict over resources

He was citing a report by the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as you well know.

http://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-re...-climate-change-immediate-threat-could-277155

A report released Monday indicates the Department of Defense has dramatically shifted its views towards climate change, and has already begun to treat the phenomenon as a significant threat to national security. Climate change, the Pentagon writes, requires immediate action on the part of the U.S. Military.

The report is a “roadmap” of the Department’s future needs and actions to effectively respond to climate change, including anticipating that climate change may require more frequent military intervention within the country to respond to natural disasters, as well as internationally to respond to “extremist ideologies” that may arise in regions where governments are destabilized due to climate-related stressors.

“The impacts of climate change may cause instability in other countries by impairing access to food and water, damaging infrastructure, spreading disease, uprooting and displacing large numbers of people, compelling mass migration, interrupting commercial activity, or restricting electricity availability,” the Pentagon writes. “These developments could undermine already-fragile governments that are unable to respond effectively or challenge currently-stable governments, as well as increasing competition and tension between countries vying for limited resources. These gaps in governance can create an avenue for extremist ideologies and conditions that foster terrorism.”

As I said, "W" was told by intelligence that Iraq had WMD's. As we both know, this was also a lie

Now as for terrorism, the countries with the worst terrorism are all heavily Islamic, and no, not all have droughts.

Do you honestly expect us to believe that if the climate were better these terrorist groups would just all go away?

 

[Kosh]

The only thing I rejected from President Obama speech was his request to Congress to pass a law to prevent people on a No-Fly list not to be able to obtain a firearm because their name is on a government list that is faulty.

A list created by the government that does not prove that the person is a convicted criminal should not be used to deny someone Constitutional Right, and again the list is faulty and has been shown to be incorrect in the past.

That is a very weak argument because there is a simple mechanism already in place to get your name removed from the list if you are on it in error.

It is a weak argument to use a list like that to deny someone their Constitutional Right. I should not have to worry some Government Bureaucrat put my name on a list mistakenly which lead to the government denying me my constitutional right.

Also it is not a easy task to remove your name from the list, and the list is flawed as can be.

So as you write it is a weak argument not to support such laws the fact remains a list like that can become a political tool to prevent individuals from their Constitutional Rights, and I am not signing on such nonsense.

Also most mass shooters if not all of them were not on the No-Fly list, so how would have a law prevent them from obtaining a firearm?

I'm glad you defend Constitutional rights for terrorists, but what about undocumented immigrants?

What rights do undocumented immigrants have under the Constitution?

What rights do terrorists have under the Constitution? Why does the Right, the NRA and the GOP want to bestow 2nd amendment rights on terrorists?

See far left drones can not answer the question, but if you want to know what rights terrorist have, look at Bill Ayers..

 

[edthecynic]

Are you going to claim everyone that is on the No-Fly list are terrorists including those that were mistakenly put on it in the past like Ted Kennedy the former Senator?

Most, not all and Kennedy was able to remove himself from the list and fly, so the list gets more accurate over time.

 

[Votto]

"They don’t have a lot of margin for error, and that has national security implications. When people are hungry, when people are displaced, when there are a lot of young people, particularly young men, who are drifting without prospects for the future, the fertility of the soil for terrorism ends up being significant," Obama said, "and it can have an impact on us."

He also said that climate change can lead to wars by fostering conflict over resources

He was citing a report by the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as you well know.

http://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-re...-climate-change-immediate-threat-could-277155

A report released Monday indicates the Department of Defense has dramatically shifted its views towards climate change, and has already begun to treat the phenomenon as a significant threat to national security. Climate change, the Pentagon writes, requires immediate action on the part of the U.S. Military.

The report is a “roadmap” of the Department’s future needs and actions to effectively respond to climate change, including anticipating that climate change may require more frequent military intervention within the country to respond to natural disasters, as well as internationally to respond to “extremist ideologies” that may arise in regions where governments are destabilized due to climate-related stressors.

“The impacts of climate change may cause instability in other countries by impairing access to food and water, damaging infrastructure, spreading disease, uprooting and displacing large numbers of people, compelling mass migration, interrupting commercial activity, or restricting electricity availability,” the Pentagon writes. “These developments could undermine already-fragile governments that are unable to respond effectively or challenge currently-stable governments, as well as increasing competition and tension between countries vying for limited resources. These gaps in governance can create an avenue for extremist ideologies and conditions that foster terrorism.”

And you just proven the OP with your post..

You should feel proud far left drone!

It's sad to see debating skills on such a low level.

But then, how intelligent can Obama apologists actually be?

 

[Kosh]

Are you going to claim everyone that is on the No-Fly list are terrorists including those that were mistakenly put on it in the past like Ted Kennedy the former Senator?

Most, not all and Kennedy was able to remove himself from the list and fly, so the list gets more accurate over time.

See how the far left drone has just proven that Kennedy was able to get removed as he had influence to do so, most that are not prominent members of Congress have to fight tooth and nail to get removed. Often with a large legal expense..

Silly far left drones!

 

[edthecynic]

As I said, "W" was told by intelligence that Iraq had WMD's. As we both know, this was also a lie

Actually he was told by the CIA and the State Dept that there were NO WMDs, but then Cheney stepped in and doctored the intelligence.

"We do not have any direct evidence that Iraq has used the period since Desert Fox to reconstitute its WMD programs"
-CIA Director, George Tenet, 2/07/2001

"We believe the sanctions have been effective, and Saddam Hussein's regime has no weapons of mass destruction."
-Condoleeza Rice, February 16th, 2001

"Containment has been achieved, and we now believe Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction or the capability of producing them."
- Colin Powell, February 23rd, 2001

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

The only thing I rejected from President Obama speech was his request to Congress to pass a law to prevent people on a No-Fly list not to be able to obtain a firearm because their name is on a government list that is faulty.

A list created by the government that does not prove that the person is a convicted criminal should not be used to deny someone Constitutional Right, and again the list is faulty and has been shown to be incorrect in the past.

That is a very weak argument because there is a simple mechanism already in place to get your name removed from the list if you are on it in error.

It is a weak argument to use a list like that to deny someone their Constitutional Right. I should not have to worry some Government Bureaucrat put my name on a list mistakenly which lead to the government denying me my constitutional right.

Also it is not a easy task to remove your name from the list, and the list is flawed as can be.

So as you write it is a weak argument not to support such laws the fact remains a list like that can become a political tool to prevent individuals from their Constitutional Rights, and I am not signing on such nonsense.

Also most mass shooters if not all of them were not on the No-Fly list, so how would have a law prevent them from obtaining a firearm?

I'm glad you defend Constitutional rights for terrorists, but what about undocumented immigrants?

What rights do undocumented immigrants have under the Constitution?

What rights do terrorists have under the Constitution? Why does the Right, the NRA and the GOP want to bestow 2nd amendment rights on terrorists?

You are writing asinine nonsense that has nothing to do with the reality we live in. A U.S. Citizen on the No-Fly list does not justify revoking their Constitutional Rights.

You have not been convicted of a crime and being on a list like the No-Fly list does not mean you are a threat but your name has been flagged as a potential threat because the government has had reports of someone with a similar name as yours as being a possible threat to the National Security of this country like Ted Kennedy name.

Why is it that you are now making the claim everyone on that list is a Terrorist?

Do you have evidence if my name is on the list I am a actual terrorist or threat to this country or could it be someone with the same name from let say Northern Ireland has the same name are the threat, and because my name is the same I should be deny my Constitutional Right just because I am on a faulty list?

You would also be calling me a terrorist and claiming as a U.S. Citizen I have no rights under the Constitution, and to write that mean you are very wrong and deluded in your way of thinking!

 

[Kosh]

As I said, "W" was told by intelligence that Iraq had WMD's. As we both know, this was also a lie

Actually he was told by the CIA and the State Dept that there were NO WMDs, but then Cheney stepped in and doctored the intelligence.

"We do not have any direct evidence that Iraq has used the period since Desert Fox to reconstitute its WMD programs"
-CIA Director, George Tenet, 2/07/2001

"We believe the sanctions have been effective, and Saddam Hussein's regime has no weapons of mass destruction."
-Condoleeza Rice, February 16th, 2001

"Containment has been achieved, and we now believe Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction or the capability of producing them."
- Colin Powell, February 23rd, 2001

Another far left propaganda post!

They still run with these debunked narratives..

 

[edthecynic]

"They don’t have a lot of margin for error, and that has national security implications. When people are hungry, when people are displaced, when there are a lot of young people, particularly young men, who are drifting without prospects for the future, the fertility of the soil for terrorism ends up being significant," Obama said, "and it can have an impact on us."

He also said that climate change can lead to wars by fostering conflict over resources

He was citing a report by the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as you well know.

http://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-re...-climate-change-immediate-threat-could-277155

A report released Monday indicates the Department of Defense has dramatically shifted its views towards climate change, and has already begun to treat the phenomenon as a significant threat to national security. Climate change, the Pentagon writes, requires immediate action on the part of the U.S. Military.

The report is a “roadmap” of the Department’s future needs and actions to effectively respond to climate change, including anticipating that climate change may require more frequent military intervention within the country to respond to natural disasters, as well as internationally to respond to “extremist ideologies” that may arise in regions where governments are destabilized due to climate-related stressors.

“The impacts of climate change may cause instability in other countries by impairing access to food and water, damaging infrastructure, spreading disease, uprooting and displacing large numbers of people, compelling mass migration, interrupting commercial activity, or restricting electricity availability,” the Pentagon writes. “These developments could undermine already-fragile governments that are unable to respond effectively or challenge currently-stable governments, as well as increasing competition and tension between countries vying for limited resources. These gaps in governance can create an avenue for extremist ideologies and conditions that foster terrorism.”

And you just proven the OP with your post..

You should feel proud far left drone!

And how exactly is that?
My link to a summary of the DOD report is from months before Obama's address last night and was not mentioned anywhere in his address.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Are you going to claim everyone that is on the No-Fly list are terrorists including those that were mistakenly put on it in the past like Ted Kennedy the former Senator?

Most, not all and Kennedy was able to remove himself from the list and fly, so the list gets more accurate over time.

You are either a liar or just playing daft!

The list has been proven to be inaccurate many time over and over again, and because President Obama tell you to support such nonsense is not right at all.

President Obama is incorrect on this issue, and I have proven beyond a doubt that passing a law that deny a U.S. Citizen their Constitution Right is beyond stupid seeing it would be based on a faulty list controlled by the Government that uses a system that watches for certain names and flags them as possible threats.

It is not easy to remove your name from that list, and with the law you are wanting to pass even if you have your name removed it still will take time, money, and possible courts hearing to get the government to correct the mistake that should not have happen in the first place, and yet you have no problem with that at all!

So as I have said many times in my responses it is a no on the No-Fly list law because the reality is the list is faulty and to write well you can have your name removed is not a simple answer as you wish to make it!

Also Ted Kennedy was stopped more than once and because he was a FAMOUS Senator it was quicker than the average American that does not have the political connections like the former Senator had.

 

[Kosh]

"They don’t have a lot of margin for error, and that has national security implications. When people are hungry, when people are displaced, when there are a lot of young people, particularly young men, who are drifting without prospects for the future, the fertility of the soil for terrorism ends up being significant," Obama said, "and it can have an impact on us."

He also said that climate change can lead to wars by fostering conflict over resources

He was citing a report by the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as you well know.

http://www.newsweek.com/pentagon-re...-climate-change-immediate-threat-could-277155

A report released Monday indicates the Department of Defense has dramatically shifted its views towards climate change, and has already begun to treat the phenomenon as a significant threat to national security. Climate change, the Pentagon writes, requires immediate action on the part of the U.S. Military.

The report is a “roadmap” of the Department’s future needs and actions to effectively respond to climate change, including anticipating that climate change may require more frequent military intervention within the country to respond to natural disasters, as well as internationally to respond to “extremist ideologies” that may arise in regions where governments are destabilized due to climate-related stressors.

“The impacts of climate change may cause instability in other countries by impairing access to food and water, damaging infrastructure, spreading disease, uprooting and displacing large numbers of people, compelling mass migration, interrupting commercial activity, or restricting electricity availability,” the Pentagon writes. “These developments could undermine already-fragile governments that are unable to respond effectively or challenge currently-stable governments, as well as increasing competition and tension between countries vying for limited resources. These gaps in governance can create an avenue for extremist ideologies and conditions that foster terrorism.”

And you just proven the OP with your post..

You should feel proud far left drone!

And how exactly is that?
My link to a summary of the DOD report is from months before Obama's address last night and was not mentioned anywhere in his address.

Oh my the far left drones puts words in bold and then shows they do not understand what they posted..

Typical far left drone!

 

[S.J.]

A I predicted, he used this opportunity to push his gun grabbing agenda. He knows criminals and terrorists will have guns no matter what, his only objective is to disarm law abiding Americans to make it easier for his terrorist friends to kill them.

 

[edthecynic]

You are writing asinine nonsense that has nothing to do with the reality we live in. A U.S. Citizen on the No-Fly list does not justify revoking their Constitutional Rights.

Not all terrorists are US Citizens and if they are citizens and terrorists they should not have access to guns any more than felons and the mentally unstable.

 

[edthecynic]

Are you going to claim everyone that is on the No-Fly list are terrorists including those that were mistakenly put on it in the past like Ted Kennedy the former Senator?

Most, not all and Kennedy was able to remove himself from the list and fly, so the list gets more accurate over time.

See how the far left drone has just proven that Kennedy was able to get removed as he had influence to do so, most that are not prominent members of Congress have to fight tooth and nail to get removed. Often with a large legal expense..

Silly far left drones!

You have the same rights as Kennedy under the law. Others without Kennedy's pull have also gotten their names removed, as long as they weren't terrorists.