kurtster wrote: 
Actually, "stonewall" was just his nickname.  He was a college professor turned general, not a mason.

 hippiechick wrote: 
Homey ain't playin' that game.  I'm refering to a limited group of individuals that are concentrated in key positions in government.  I would hope that most would be understanding of that.

Do you wish for me to repost a list of those to whom I am refereing to refresh your memory ?  It would only take a couple of mouse clicks.

 buzz wrote: 

Pardon the over simplification but,

the gentleman living at 1600 Pa. Ave does the opposite of what he says aloud.

Didn't he promise the most transparent administration and government ever, free of lobbysists ?

This man has built more stonewalls than Jackson could've ever even imagined.

 sirdroseph wrote: 

First you criticize me, then you flatter me.  Make up your mind!

 aflanigan wrote: 
I don't think there is a conspiracy everyone knows that left handers are inherently superior in every way, that is just common knowledge.

 kurtster wrote: 
You're completely missing the left-handed conspiracy determined to take over the presidency.

geordiezimmerman wrote:
Your being a foreigner doesn't disqualify you from having an opinion, even an informed one. Looking forward to that someday.

Election's over, Mr. Obama is president now. I will judge him by his actions, not by those of his predecessors or the promises of his former rivals. Feel free to use any basis you like for your own assessment.

Maybe you could nominate him for another Nobel—you know, to urge him to try harder. The last one seems to have worn off.

 sirdroseph wrote: 


Not until she's 35. 

 winter wrote: 
Honey Boo Boo.

 geordiezimmerman wrote: 
So you agree with him and my position is even more progressive than his. I don't think we should be fighting a war on terror at all and bombing anyone period. Hmmmm interesting. Oh and I know I am on your ignore list, doesn't mean you are on mine.

 sirdroseph wrote: 
What is required to become an elected official is to win the approval of a majority of voters. So if the qualities that appeal to a majority of voters are unsuitable in your eyes, fair enough - but the root of your quibble is with the electorate, not the elected. ;)

 But I take your point. I trust this particular President more than I would many others, but I don't give him a blank check, either. Compare him to, say, Nixon, and he comes out looking pretty damn good. Compare him to, say, Washington, and maybe he looks a bit more tarnished.

There needs to be more oversight than "the President says you should be dead, so there it is". 

 winter wrote: 
That, i can agree with.  

 geordiezimmerman wrote: 
Well alright then and thank you for illustrating my very point better than I ever could have.

 winter wrote: 
I suppose that is where you and I have a fundamental difference. I trust no President or any other elected official just on the face of it because of the personality traits and what is required to become an elected official. Secondly, who is President should be absolutely irrelevant in relation to following the Constitution and Bill of Rights.

 sirdroseph wrote: 
Dude, did i tell you, you were on my ignore list? I didn't? Well, you are.
You are in absolutely no position to speak to me about how i speak of other people. I had you down as No1 nutjob in this place quite a while back. A big enough arsenal to wipe out Mississippi, talk of armageddon and zombies and....actually, i've said this stuff to you before and you have already taken up enough of my time. Go 'prep' while the rest of us live and try and make some constructive changes to our world, instead of hiding in your cave with your family who you are forcing to believe what you believe.

As i've advised you before, seek help.


This is the very last time you will receive any sort of response from me. Reply to any of my posts any time you like. But just so you and the forum knows, so you's can be in no doubt, you are being ignored by me from now on.

Goodbye, and good luck. You sure as hell need it


   

Let's just establish bona fides up front and spare the drama: voted for Gore, voted for Kerry, voted for Obama both times. I strongly feel that Obama is a far better President than either McCain or Romney would have been, and is a significant improvement over his predecessor. On the whole, I like his performance in the White House and agree with his policies.

That said, I am not happy with a few things: Guantanamo is still up and running, the Patriot Act is still the law of the land, and we're assassinating people overseas with no oversight. I realize that fighting terrorist organizations overseas requires bloodshed. But our military and intelligence organizations need to be answerable to law and morality, and while I trust this particular President I'm not willing to grant him or any future Presidents a blank check on signing death warrants with no review and no oversight.

 geordiezimmerman wrote: 
OK, for one thing you have no idea who you are talking too when it comes to general knowledge of world events. I have seen few people that have more well rounded knowledge than Lazy. Secondly a lot of the problems "people like you" have with some of your thoughts is not that you are giving derogatory opinions on our government, obviously we have lots of problems with out government as well. What ruffles a lot of our feathers is when you make derogatory comments on us the actual citizens and make wide ranging, assumptive off the cuff remarks that are not accurate about people that have a differing opinion of you in this forum. Thirdly, virtually none of the people that you have had disagreements with regarding this subject voted for Bush and have had the exact same issues with Bush as they do Obama which is actually more frustrating because it proves that the 2 major parties do not offer us a choice for those of us who not only think we should not be targeting US citizens with drones, should not be targeting anyone with drones and to take it even further should not be waging a war against terrorism (which is impossible by the very definition of the world terrorism) at all because there is no way to stop terrorism so no innocents should die in the futile attempt. Not to mention the self fulfilling propagation of future terrorists by virtue of us killing their parents, brothers and sisters in their own homes.

 Lazy8 wrote: 
Seriously, what is it with people like you? You think because i live in another country i can't have an opinion on yours? Does that mean i can't have an opinion on the brutal regime in North Korea? Or Zimbabwe? Let me know if you need to know where any of those places are, because you seem to have your head so far up your own fucking arse, that it wouldn't surprise me if you knew very much at all about anywhere outside your precious United States of America. Also, you are trying to make out that i'm making this an America v UK argument. I'm not, never have done, never will. (and if you took time to read my previous posts instead of just butting in talking, without thinking you would know see this)

But anyway, er, are you saying the previous President didn't kill anyone in another country? Are you saying the previous President didn't have high unemployment? Are you saying he didn't have a huge deficit? Are you?

You could of course look at the state of the world and the countries you were occupied in when Obama took the presidency, couldn't you? Tell me, how was Obama meant to clean up after Bush and how was he meant to have cleaned it up so quickly? Go on, tell me, tell us all because you seem to think you all lived in Disneyland before Obama came to power.
Now, and i repeat, I don't think the sun shines out of Obama's arse, not for one second do i, but the choice was between Obama and Mitt friggin' Romney! 

So if you don't mind, as long as live in a world where America has so much power over the rest of the world and therefore has a direct influence on my life, then i will continue to have an opinion about it. Okay?
Be careful out there. 

 buzz wrote: 

Secrecy

 

Will someone please explain to me why the memorandum that justifies the use of drones to kill American citizens is a classified document?