Nigerian tries to blow up plane..

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

isn't a moderate in themiddle? an extremist would be on one side or the other, so extremist moderate does not make any sense to me. isn't socialistic and libertarian an oxymoron? socialistic is on the left and libertarian is on the right, with those two terms you can't be both, rather its a contradiction.

Look... there are certain positions I hold that people on the left would consider far right (or libertarian, which often is at odds with what is considered 'right wing',) and there are certain views of mine that people on the right would consider far left (or socialist.) So, if you put all of my extreme political thoughts on a scale, it would balance out somewhere near the middle, making me a moderate. Get it?

if you will read the thread you will see that people were blaming obama for taking 3 days to address this.

And if one read between the lines, which weren't that close together, one could see my disdain for them raising that issue.

so spare me your lamenting.

I'm sorry you feel that way.

it is how it is and the situation in this country is what it is.

Unfortunately, you are correct. Unfortunately, you are part of the problem, IMO, and part of the masses who allow the masters of both wings of our one party system to keep pitting people against each other while stealing our rights and money.

this "stop aligning" come together rah rah crap is not going to work.

Evidently not :(

the republicans have made it clear that they are not on board for anything other than every man for themselves, lower taxes, no gay marriage, and increased military spending, and NO to anything the dems or obama suggests.

Yeah... just like the Dems a short time back. THAT'S THE PROBLEM!!! Not to mention that you do realize the position of almost the entire Dem leadership, including President Obama, when it comes to gay marriage, don't you? Don't know why supporters of the Dem power structure feel they have any legitimacy in bringing up gay marriage as if there is a meaningful difference between the parties, but enough of that.

they sit back and point fingers at the current president just like others sit back and point fingers at the prior one that fucked everything up so terribly.

THAT'S THE PROBLEM!!!

if you are going to quote me, can you refute my article or not? or are you just going to sit back and complain about it?

The latter, since there's not much there to refute. However, is any of it germane? Not in my opinion, but... yeah... it is one more point for the "We're not as bad as Bush" side. WoooHoooo :roll:

prfctlefts wrote:

It's not just the right that is criticizing this administration.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/30/opini ... .html?_r=1

you started this thread, and you seem to be most concerned about obama's delayed response. do you care to comment on my article?

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i'm not going waste my time with this response.

Whatever... I'm just speaking from the heart, as were you. Didn't mean to be overly bombastic, and hope it didn't come across that way.

i don't need you to tell me what the problem is.

You can't handle the truth. You want me on that wall... you NEED me on that wall :twisted:

if i am part of the problem, then so are you because i do not see you doing anything about it other than pointing out the obvious.

I vote EVERY November, and for ALL federal offices and most state offices I vote Green, Libertarian, etc. instead of GOP or Dem. I spend significant amounts of time trying to get others to do the same. Don't know what else I'm supposed to do, but am open to suggestions.

can anyone tell me what would have changed if Obama went on TV or whatever and mentioned this right away? how would life be any different?

believe me, i think there's plenty to be critical of Obama on but this just seems like nit picking. it seems reasonable he wanted to have some information first before having a million questions cast at him and fox screaming al qaeda is trying to attack us and trying to whip everybody into a panic.

to me wanting to do some investigating before making a statement is far different from being told the country is under attack, not someone TRIED to do something and is in custody but we are currently being attacked, right now.

another key difference is Obama wasn't going to be doing any of the investigating himself, he was waiting for a report with information and facts so he had more to go on than speculation and 'i don't know' s when asked questions if he came right out and said it. Bush, on the other hand, DID have a role to play. he was told we were under attack, so it was HIS responsibility to decide what to do about it, after all, he is the decider, right?? and because he was a rich yuppy loaf with no real experience or sense he had no idea what to do, i'm not even sure i would know what to do but i wouldn't just sit around and wait for someone else to do it, which is what happened. Cheney and Rumsfeld called the shots that day, it was them who finally scrambled fighter jets, not Bush.

i know all presidents are just a figurehead and work towards certain interests depending on who funded their campaigns and invested in them but i really believe Bush let others do a bulk of the work and make a lot of the decisions, at least his first term and most of his 2nd. hell, he even admitted he doesn't read about things or look into them, he just relies on those around him telling him what he needs to know. i think it was paul oneil who compalined about him being so uninterested and unquestioning

phew, rant over!

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

by the way, exactly who are we at war with anyway? i don't know anymore. it just seems like if you are brown and from another country we will fight you....

even ainstain cant answer this

From what was being said this morning Janet Napolitano droped the ball on this one. Heard it on Cnn and Fox. Then the lady taking Larry Kings place was trying to blame it on Bush and making excuses for Janet.....

concertaholicshirt wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i'm not going waste my time with this response.

Whatever... I'm just speaking from the heart, as were you. Didn't mean to be overly bombastic, and hope it didn't come across that way.

i don't need you to tell me what the problem is.

You can't handle the truth. You want me on that wall... you NEED me on that wall :twisted:

if i am part of the problem, then so are you because i do not see you doing anything about it other than pointing out the obvious.

I vote EVERY November, and for ALL federal offices and most state offices I vote Green, Libertarian, etc. instead of GOP or Dem. I spend significant amounts of time trying to get others to do the same. Don't know what else I'm supposed to do, but am open to suggestions.

Voting Libertarian is a great start to correcting the problem. We need to clean up Washington by getting some of these lifer Senators and Representatives out.

JB811 wrote:

Janet Napolitano is an idiot. Period.

I know for myself I do not want to give up privacy for flying. I don't want to go through whole body scans. Where will it stop? By doing this crap you are giving in to them regardless, and the terrorists have won because they will have instilled fear. The correct answer is to just make the current system work, but no we have these knee-jerk reactions and only make things worse for those that obey the laws.

But that is what this country is becoming. Instead on focusing how to enforce what is already on the books we try to jam more more more down the citizens throats. It is happening in every aspect, not just terror prevention. Enforce the laws that are already made, make the programs works that are already made, hire competent people to do both. It is that simple.

tell me, how would you go about "making the current system work"?

I love how some think everything is so simple...

inmytree wrote:

JB811 wrote:

Janet Napolitano is an idiot. Period.

I know for myself I do not want to give up privacy for flying. I don't want to go through whole body scans. Where will it stop? By doing this crap you are giving in to them regardless, and the terrorists have won because they will have instilled fear. The correct answer is to just make the current system work, but no we have these knee-jerk reactions and only make things worse for those that obey the laws.

But that is what this country is becoming. Instead on focusing how to enforce what is already on the books we try to jam more more more down the citizens throats. It is happening in every aspect, not just terror prevention. Enforce the laws that are already made, make the programs works that are already made, hire competent people to do both. It is that simple.

tell me, how would you go about "making the current system work"?

I love how some think everything is so simple...

Really... if it was that easy to just "make the current system work", then we wouldn't have problems with health care, welfare, airport security, social security or just about any of the other big issues of today.

JB811 wrote:

Janet Napolitano is an idiot. Period.

I know for myself I do not want to give up privacy for flying. I don't want to go through whole body scans. Where will it stop? By doing this crap you are giving in to them regardless, and the terrorists have won because they will have instilled fear. The correct answer is to just make the current system work, but no we have these knee-jerk reactions and only make things worse for those that obey the laws.

But that is what this country is becoming. Instead on focusing how to enforce what is already on the books we try to jam more more more down the citizens throats. It is happening in every aspect, not just terror prevention. Enforce the laws that are already made, make the programs works that are already made, hire competent people to do both. It is that simple.

I understand the privacy concerns with full body scanners that project the image of an unclothed body, but new software can project a stylized image rather than an actual picture onto a computer screen, highlighting the area of the body where suspicious objects can be concealed.

Under the current system, how exactly would airport security detect chemicals hidden in a person's underwear?