ron paul=awesome/kickass?

[K-tuna]

Respectfully, The Founders may not have know exactly HOW the times would change, but they WISELY knew one thing: Human Nature. They knew tyranny, lies , honor, morals, war, freedom and lack of control, and responsibility and where it leads.

Of course they had no idea of what and how we'd advance as a people, but they made sure the constitution was flexible enough to change if times called for if absolutely needed.

And , If you have folks wanting strap bombs on and walk into a crowd and kill as many women and children as they can, then I have no problem with "DUBYA" CONSIDER doing what he can to keep people safe and change with the times. Ol' Barack has no problem INCREASING drone Strikes , getting into war with LIBYA ( hiding behind the UN to do so) and GITMO still is there doing its thing. hmmmmmmm.....



sorry....continue.


Can someone tell exactly how Im supposed to beleive PMSNBC is so reputable and unbiased...that s a bigger joke than Joe Biden.

[kwame k]

Somebody BAN this twat.

[Jagermeister]

Respectfully, The Founders may not have know exactly HOW the times would change, but they WISELY knew one thing: Human Nature. They knew tyranny, lies , honor, morals, war, freedom and lack of control, and responsibility and where it leads.

Of course they had no idea of what and how we'd advance as a people, but they made sure the constitution was flexible enough to change if times called for if absolutely needed.

And , If you have folks wanting strap bombs on and walk into a crowd and kill as many women and children as they can, then I have no problem with "DUBYA" CONSIDER doing what he can to keep people safe and change with the times. Ol' Barack has no problem INCREASING drone Strikes , getting into war with LIBYA ( hiding behind the UN to do so) and GITMO still is there doing its thing. hmmmmmmm.....



sorry....continue.


Can someone tell exactly how Im supposed to beleive PMSNBC is so reputable and unbiased...that s a bigger joke than Joe Biden.

I like the new guy.

[kwame k]

Respectfully, The Founders may not have know exactly HOW the times would change, but they WISELY knew one thing: Human Nature. They knew tyranny, lies , honor, morals, war, freedom and lack of control, and responsibility and where it leads.

Of course they had no idea of what and how we'd advance as a people, but they made sure the constitution was flexible enough to change if times called for if absolutely needed.

That's my point......the Constitution lives and breathes according to the times.

Every time I hear a politician or Teabagger spout off about going back to a strict adherence of the Constitution......in the same breathe they talk about changing it and THEN adhering to it! So my question is......what parts are you going to change or are you just making a blanket statement because you know it's an "issue" button you can throw in your rhetoric arsenal. You know like, "I'm tough on crime, want to save SS, I'll make the country safe and that bile that they spew.

And , If you have folks wanting strap bombs on and walk into a crowd and kill as many women and children as they can, then I have no problem with "DUBYA" CONSIDER doing what he can to keep people safe and change with the times. Ol' Barack has no problem INCREASING drone Strikes , getting into war with LIBYA ( hiding behind the UN to do so) and GITMO still is there doing its thing. hmmmmmmm.....

So you have zero problems with suspending the writ of Habeas Corpus, torture, the blanket spying on average citizens without a warrant, and invading Sovereign Nations. So basically you're against the Constitution and The Bill of Rights.

Let's see what a Founding Father has to say about that exact subject........."Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.". Don't think old Ben Franklin could make that any clearer, do you?

For the record..........how many troops do we have in Libya right now? How many troops did we send there? The last what.......5 Presidents bombed a country in conjunction with NATO.......1 President invaded a country with NATO.....His son basically said fuck NATO and we'll invade a Sovereign Nation without their consent and I'll lie to the American people about why we're going to invade.....

sorry....continue.

By all means, lets!

Can someone tell exactly how Im supposed to beleive PMSNBC is so reputable and unbiased...that s a bigger joke than Joe Biden.

No idea, don't watch opinionist news channels.......

[K-tuna]

Look, Im not aiming top pick a fight/ disagreement ...........Of Course we don't have a lot in libya...Obama decided to hide behind the UN. He didn't ask congress for approval. he just DID IT.


Aas far as suspending habeas corpus...Lincoln did it. May have been a bad idea, but it worked out the way it should. But I don't want anyone locked up, i also don't like the idea of idiots with bombs sneeking throiugh the border or another 9/11.


Invading a foreign country? Sorry i don't see that the same way. And to be fair, other than our own, can we name one country we have had war with , or "invaded" , that WE ACTUALLY CLAIMED?

When Iraq had elections and stabilized enough to sell its own oil..did we we claim it or did Bush step back and let them sell it to whom they wanted....They sold it to the Brits, Russia and China.


I don't normall quote fiction but in this case it explains my personal view as far as torture goes , a great line from one of the last episodes of 24 ..

" I know there are laws i have to follow, i know these laws were made by smarter men than I, but if theres someone gonna blow up a bus in a crowd of people and I have no choice to force this man to tell me what i need to know, I can't ignore those people....im gonna do what i have to do"


If a guy knows something for sure, and its him or the bomb in times square...sorry, sucks to be that guy.

But To be sure Ben Franklin was indeed very smart.. I tread lightly in any opinion that seems to disagree with him.

My only Problem with Ron Paul is that he has a Ostrich foreign policy. Its our fault all those poor jihadists are pissed off.....its a blind fool crock. Its absolutely dangerous. Does a bully ease off you if you try to avoid him? Were we in Afghanistan , Iraq, when 9/11 happened? were we bombing them?


I respect where your coming from, But We do have a right to defend ourselves and if there proper intelligence saying theres a threat, then we should act on it and i don't feel thats a violation of the constitution.

[kwame k]

Look, Im not aiming top pick a fight/ disagreement ...........Of Course we don't have a lot in libya...Obama decided to hide behind the UN. He didn't ask congress for approval. he just DID IT.

We're debating that's what this forum is for........

We have, according to our Defense Secretary, 16 US troops on the ground there for our Embassy in Tripoli.........that's 16 people. Although I imagine they are highly skilled and would be worth about 5 times that many as far as fighting skills go

We are a member of NATO and have given them support as did other members of NATO......we were there in a support role and the only time we had boots on the ground was to rescue downed pilots. All in accordance with NATO. Yes, we bombed them but turned over control of the No-Fly zone to NATO months ago. We were there to minimize civilians casualties. We never invaded, period.

Isn't that what being the bastion of Democracy and the defender of Freedom is all about? If not then the war in Iraq was not what it was sold to us as......overthrowing a blood thirsty Dictator. These people were trying to throw off the yoke of tyranny, we didn't invade and only gave those people a fighting chance.

The confusion comes in from the Neocons because they get pissed when it's not their side warring and tried to make a huge case about a Vietnam era law that says after 60 days the President must get congress' approval. Remember the accusations that we were leading from behind, which to this day makes no sense to me. The President acted in accordance with the War Powers Resolution and didn't need approval.

Aas far as suspending habeas corpus...Lincoln did it. May have been a bad idea, but it worked out the way it should. But I don't want anyone locked up, i also don't like the idea of idiots with bombs sneeking throiugh the border or another 9/11.

Man, that's a stretch there....suspending Habeas Corpus because the Nation was in the midst of a Civil War is a hell of a lot different than what happened on 9/11.....not even close.

Who gets to decide on who we get to spy on.....what if I say something that may be contrary to what the powers that be like? Does that give them the right to spy on me, detain me and take away my rights as an American? That's a Pandora Box that I don't want open and there's zero evidence that when the Government hacked into AT&T and just downloaded all communications that it stopped any terrorist, period.

I'm reminded of the Blackstone Ratio, "better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer",

[Nickdfresh]

Libya was the perfect war from an American/NATO interventionist point-of-view. Few if any NATO personnel were casualties, the Libyan people did most of their own fighting on the ground, and we got rid of an enormous cunt...

[kwame k]

Invading a foreign country? Sorry i don't see that the same way. And to be fair, other than our own, can we name one country we have had war with , or "invaded" , that WE ACTUALLY CLAIMED?

When Iraq had elections and stabilized enough to sell its own oil..did we we claim it or did Bush step back and let them sell it to whom they wanted....They sold it to the Brits, Russia and China.

Ah, when you send troops into a country and overthrow the established government that's a text book definition of invasion.

We were told that Iraq would pay us back in oil for invading their country......right on national TV. Another lie about justification for the war.

You're losing me with the CLAIMED part......you either invade a country or you don't.

I don't normall quote fiction but in this case it explains my personal view as far as torture goes , a great line from one of the last episodes of 24 ..

" I know there are laws i have to follow, i know these laws were made by smarter men than I, but if theres someone gonna blow up a bus in a crowd of people and I have no choice to force this man to tell me what i need to know, I can't ignore those people....im gonna do what i have to do"


If a guy knows something for sure, and its him or the bomb in times square...sorry, sucks to be that guy.

I'll let you off easy on this one because you're new but........find a better source than a TV show. Read through some of the posts here on other subjects so you get a feel how we do things around here.

But To be sure Ben Franklin was indeed very smart.. I tread lightly in any opinion that seems to disagree with him.

Good policy.

My only Problem with Ron Paul is that he has a Ostrich foreign policy. Its our fault all those poor jihadists are pissed off.....its a blind fool crock. Its absolutely dangerous. Does a bully ease off you if you try to avoid him? Were we in Afghanistan , Iraq, when 9/11 happened? were we bombing them?

We invaded Iraq before 9/11, you do remember that little party we had back in the 90's when Dubya's daddy was in power, right?

Part of what pissed Bin Laden off was we had troops in Mecca, you know during that little get together back in the 90's. That lead to his wanting to pull off 9/11. Yes our cowboy diplomacy, might makes right, caused us to be in the mess we got ourselves into.

I respect where your coming from, But We do have a right to defend ourselves and if there proper intelligence saying theres a threat, then we should act on it and i don't feel thats a violation of the constitution.

Ah, the Neocon Preemptive War Theory.......maybe we should arrest people before they commit murder or crimes, by that logic. Guilty until proven innocent. That seems to go against everything we stand for as a country.

There was zero, I repeat zero terrorist in Iraq when we invaded the second time. Saddam was as scared of the Taliban as we were. He wasn't a zealot and was more Westernize than they or Bin Laden would of tolerated.

Tons of research has been done on this subject here....search this forum and it'll open your eyes.

[kwame k]

Libya was the perfect war from an American/NATO interventionist point-of-view. Few if any NATO personnel were casualties, the Libyan people did most of their own fighting on the ground, and we got rid of an enormous cunt...

...and we're not bogged down in a decade long occupation.

We were the good guys in this one!

[Jagermeister]

I'm not reading all this shit but I'm glad to see it.

[kwame k]

I'm not reading all this shit but I'm glad to see it.

Not to worry, Jag.

I'm sure Rush/Beck will be right along to tell you what your opinion is

[K-tuna]

...and we're not bogged down in a decade long occupation.

We were the good guys in this one!

No , We very much are not..at least not yet. Like a bunch of people did, whether its Libya or Egypt...everyone has jumped the gun on how "democratic" these uprisings actually are, or how smart they were. In these cases everyone has over looked how the progenitor of Al Queada, The muslim brotherhood have positioned themselves to take over . It may VERY well be they have traded douchebags for far more evil replacements.

Obama used a loophole by claiming he was working with UN so he could do what he wanted.....Funny , Lets see a Repub do that and see how happy the libs are with that.


No Obama wasn't the good guy in that, he went over congress's head. BTW, years ago Khaddaffi had ALREADY given up to Bush. he was no immmediate threat because he had constant cooperation with us.

I repeat He was NO immediate threat. He had surrendered to Bush shortly after 9/11.

Ok The First Iraq war was because Saddam was gassing the Kurds AND Saddam for years was ignoring UN sanctions. Are we supposed to always ignore Genocide ?

I'm sorry , any excuse that tries to justify Bin Laden doesn't wash. and Bin laden and Al Qaeda weren't bombing just us , he hit his own people, the saudis, and anyone he could to make a point.

I can disagree with you , but telling me to "open my eyes" assumes somehow you're right , ..I don't agree, at all.


And I stand by My Quote from 24...it express my feeling perfectly. If I have a choice , theres a hidden nuke and I know some jihadist has some info. Sorry , I'm gonna do what it takes.


Zero terroists in Iraq? Really, do you have those statistics and facts from the CIA? Were you there. that absolutist statement is hurting your argument.

I have NO problem with the preemptive approach as long as we have the info and approval from congress.


BTW, when I wrote " sorry...continue" it was an acknowledgement that I butted in. Didn't't mean to sound snarky.

[LoungeMachine]

What utter bullshit.

But keep it up, with Brie gone we need someone to post revisionist history FAUX bullshit.



May as well be you.

[K-tuna]

Just so you can eat that bs you get from PMS-NBC.

heres just one recent mention of it:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/when-condoleezza-rice-met-moammar-gaddafi/2011/10/25/gIQAtdFsGM_blog.html

and since we're calling BS, .... Mobarak, ousted Pres of Egypt was a douche, but where as he at least kept a moderate luke warm relationship with Israel , now because the instigation of the Muslim brotherhood, we have a breakdown of the egyptian society and most " freedom fighters " and civilians calling for death to israel and are at odds with the military...which were pro-civilan before and because the cops were corrupt.

sound like Obama is doing so well. actually every country he's helped has seemed to fallen in MORE chaos....not less.


But I'm done, i've made the points i wanted to make. You can make all the stupid "Faux News " jokes..i still yet to see anyone prove the PMS-NBC'ers are any better and not nutbag liars.

[LoungeMachine]