President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

General Intelligent Discussion & One Thread About That Buttknuckle

Moderator: Andrew

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Sat Jun 15, 2013 1:18 am

Don wrote:I can tell you from first hand experience, Reagan didn't always return salutes. Neither did Bush Sr or Clinton. On average, the Presidents are in position to salute about a dozen times a day. They will salute MAYBE one-third of the time at most. A lot of 3 and 4 star generals will skip salutes also, especially if they are with someone. They'll just give you a nod at the most. As military members, we would take umbrage with that FAR more then not being acknowledged by a civilian, whether it be the President, Secretary of State, etc.

In actuality, heads of state saluting is far more prevalent in third world countries, Banana republics and the like. Many EU leaders don't salute back either. It's in keeping with the image of separation between military and civilian rule in government.


Not sure if this has anything to do with the saluting issue, but, basic military etiquette is not saluting if one or both parties in question is not wearing a cover and/or is out of uniform. For those president’s who had prior military experience, they’re decision to salute or not to salute may have been influenced by this rule, along with the possibility of a “senior moment”. It may also depend on the criteria of the situation as well.

It is also basic military etiquette for the uniformed service member, if they can identify the other party as a superior officer, to salute an out of uniform superior officer and that out of uniform superior officer not to salute back because of being out of uniform, just one of many examples would be at the main gate of a base when an officer is driving on or off base in their vehicle. The gate sentry is required to salute the officer in question but that officer usually will not salute the gate sentry in return.
I've never eaten a piece of sushi I didn't thoroughly enjoy.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Sat Jun 15, 2013 3:07 am

Interesting in the news now is the NSA is claiming that the current "spy" tactics have prevented hundreds of terrorist attacks from occuring. I have to raise the bs flag on this, simply because we all know how authorities "brag" about preventing a terrorist attack from occuring when they do in fact prevent one from going down. How many have they discussed preventing in the past say ten or so years? 2....4.....6, etc.? I can count maybe three or four, but no more. Now all of a sudden to win the argument they are claiming hundreds if not thousands. BS! Too little....too late imo.

But like I stressed days ago, I don't care that the government is doing what they are doing, if it trully prevents terrorist attacks. I've got nothing to hide, no nude shots of me or my wife on "the cloud", no criminal activites in the works or involved with, etc.
I've never eaten a piece of sushi I didn't thoroughly enjoy.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby conversationpc » Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:12 am

The_Noble_Cause wrote:The show has changed, Dave. You can't deny that. Stuff like Friday Moron trivia was fucking funny. Now the show is mostly 3 hours of Beck either asking for listeners' money, or Stu trying to sound witty and sarcastic and just failing.


They did Moron Trivia again this last year. The two years before that, they had moved it to the ASS (After Show Show) with Pat and Stu.

As for Pat and Stu, I find them and their show after Glenn's to be be usually funnier and more entertaining than the main show.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby slucero » Sat Jun 15, 2013 6:53 am

rumor has it that Becks big news is that the Whitehouse used NSA hacked emails to blackmail and extort Chief Justice Roberts to vote to uphold the ACA (Obamacare).

If there's evidence to prove it.. the collateral damage would be stupendous.

for now.. just rumor.. still awaiting the actual report..

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Memorex » Sat Jun 15, 2013 7:19 am

I highly doubt this. In fact, I'll go on record as saying this is completely false. I've heard this rumor before and if someone has proof, they ought to have shown it by now.

I can't imagine any supreme court justice, no matter what their political leanings, would allow themselves to ever get into such a position and I can't imagine any president ever considering such a thing. It's so far beyond believable to me that it's impossible to entertain the thought.

If true - and it's not - all parties involved, including Roberts, should be jailed for the remainder of their lives.


slucero wrote:rumor has it that Becks big news is that the Whitehouse used NSA hacked emails to blackmail and extort Chief Justice Roberts to vote to uphold the ACA (Obamacare).

If there's evidence to prove it.. the collateral damage would be stupendous.

for now.. just rumor.. still awaiting the actual report..
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Memorex » Sat Jun 15, 2013 7:23 am

By the way, wasn't Beck supposed to have the big reveal on Thursday? Has he stated why he didn't reveal it?

Don't we have enough "real" problems?
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby slucero » Sat Jun 15, 2013 7:53 am

I heard it was Thursday.. but I don't watch Beck.. just passing on the rumor...


I'm not sure I'd say its "impossible"... given the revelations of the last 3 weeks.. or in 1969, when Tom Charles Huston, aide to President Nixon, recommended using the IRS to examine left-wing tax-exempt organizations to make sure they were complying with the law. Nixon agreed. Five years later, the House of Representatives drew up articles of impeachment against Nixon, alleging, among other offenses, that the President had used the IRS improperly.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby conversationpc » Sat Jun 15, 2013 9:37 am

Memorex wrote:I highly doubt this. In fact, I'll go on record as saying this is completely false. I've heard this rumor before and if someone has proof, they ought to have shown it by now.

I can't imagine any supreme court justice, no matter what their political leanings, would allow themselves to ever get into such a position and I can't imagine any president ever considering such a thing. It's so far beyond believable to me that it's impossible to entertain the thought.

If true - and it's not - all parties involved, including Roberts, should be jailed for the remainder of their lives.


I can imagine this and certainly more. If there's one thing that people have proven since the beginning of civilization, it's that we're capable of almost any kind of stupidity.
My blog = Dave's Dominion
User avatar
conversationpc
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 17830
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 5:53 am
Location: Slightly south of sanity...

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Memorex » Sat Jun 15, 2013 2:50 pm

Can we all agree that asking the IRS to get all up in the business of certain entities is a hell of a lot less problematic than bribing a supreme court justice? I can see something like this in the olden days, but in the days of the 24 hour news cycle? No way.

And any justice that voted a certain way based on fear of embarrassing revelations should burn in hell. I depend on all 9 of those voting on one thing and one thing only - the constitution. That's it. Now, I know they all interject their politics and it annoys the hell out of me, but they were put on the bench because that's how they perceived the intention of how we should live. In other words, when 5 justices vote one way and 4 vote another, it's because all 9 believe in what they are doing.

Well, I am hoping it's not this and actually I'm hoping it's nothing. The country needs to get on track.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Boomchild » Sat Jun 15, 2013 3:05 pm

Glad to see that B.O. is so concerned about wasteful spending.

http://now.msn.com/obama-africa-trip-co ... ?gt1=50501
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby slucero » Sat Jun 15, 2013 3:19 pm

Memorex wrote:Can we all agree that asking the IRS to get all up in the business of certain entities is a hell of a lot less problematic than bribing a supreme court justice? I can see something like this in the olden days, but in the days of the 24 hour news cycle? No way.

And any justice that voted a certain way based on fear of embarrassing revelations should burn in hell. I depend on all 9 of those voting on one thing and one thing only - the constitution. That's it. Now, I know they all interject their politics and it annoys the hell out of me, but they were put on the bench because that's how they perceived the intention of how we should live. In other words, when 5 justices vote one way and 4 vote another, it's because all 9 believe in what they are doing.

Well, I am hoping it's not this and actually I'm hoping it's nothing. The country needs to get on track.



Actually SCOTUS judges voting their political beliefs is the problem, and its also a violation of their oath.

The SCOTUS is supposed to literally interpret the Constitution.. not interpret it "as it would apply in modern times"... which is the common argument those who view the Constitution as a "living" or "outdated" document have.

It is also why Madison documented all the Constitutional Convention debates for future SCOTUS's to reference, AND the Framers of the Constitution created an amendment process for Congress and The People to amend and change the Constitution.
Last edited by slucero on Sat Jun 15, 2013 4:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Memorex » Sat Jun 15, 2013 3:23 pm

slucero wrote:
Memorex wrote:Can we all agree that asking the IRS to get all up in the business of certain entities is a hell of a lot less problematic than bribing a supreme court justice? I can see something like this in the olden days, but in the days of the 24 hour news cycle? No way.

And any justice that voted a certain way based on fear of embarrassing revelations should burn in hell. I depend on all 9 of those voting on one thing and one thing only - the constitution. That's it. Now, I know they all interject their politics and it annoys the hell out of me, but they were put on the bench because that's how they perceived the intention of how we should live. In other words, when 5 justices vote one way and 4 vote another, it's because all 9 believe in what they are doing.

Well, I am hoping it's not this and actually I'm hoping it's nothing. The country needs to get on track.



Actually SCOTUS judges voting their political beliefs is the problem, and its also a violation of their oath.

The SCOTUS is supposed to literally interpret the Constitution.. not interpret it "as it would apply in modern times"... which is the common argument those who view the Constitution as a "living" or "outdated" document have.

It is also why the Framers of the Constitution created an amendment process, and why Madison document all the Constitutional Convention debates for future SCOTUS's to reference.


I agree and that's why it makes me crazy. It's hard to imagine that if strict interpretation were in play that the court could be split so often. But, I've given up on that and so I get that people see things differently. But they still do it with honor and conviction and based on what they truly believe. Not a bribe.

By the way, if this all were true the Democrats should be thrilled. Because once the president and the chief justice are kicked out, Biden will be shifting the court the other direction. So there's that.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby slucero » Sun Jun 16, 2013 8:28 am

Aetna to exit California's individual insurance market
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/aetna-exi ... 16569.html

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Don » Sun Jun 16, 2013 9:08 am

slucero wrote:Aetna to exit California's individual insurance market
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/aetna-exi ... 16569.html


"The company will continue to offer health insurance to employers and Medicare beneficiaries in California, as well as dental and life-insurance products"

Outside of those people (and it's few and far between), I know absolutely no one who has Aetna. Any one here use them? Everyone seems to have Kaiser or Anthem.
Don
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 24896
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:01 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Don » Sun Jun 16, 2013 9:22 am

That explains why I never hear people talking about Aetna here in So Cal.

"Aetna, Cigna and United Health account for about 7% of the individual health insurance market in California.
Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield of California and Kaiser Permanente account for nearly 87% of the individual market in the state"
Don
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 24896
Joined: Sun Jul 22, 2007 3:01 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Sun Jun 16, 2013 1:14 pm

conversationpc wrote:
The_Noble_Cause wrote:The show has changed, Dave. You can't deny that. Stuff like Friday Moron trivia was fucking funny. Now the show is mostly 3 hours of Beck either asking for listeners' money, or Stu trying to sound witty and sarcastic and just failing.


They did Moron Trivia again this last year. The two years before that, they had moved it to the ASS (After Show Show) with Pat and Stu.

As for Pat and Stu, I find them and their show after Glenn's to be be usually funnier and more entertaining than the main show.


So what? The show has definitively changed, so has Beck. It even got to the point where he started to lose major affiliates - like WPHT in Philly, where he used to broadcast live from. Then, of course, he scaled back the apocalyptic Mormon doomsday rhetoric. As for Stu...he was a lowly intern that Beck picked up along the way. Unfortunately, his political and historical knowledge remains at intern level.

Beck has gone on record apologizing for his support of the Bush years and how his education is always evolving. The reprinting of his first ghost-written book, "The Real America", even now comes with the nifty new subtitle "early writings from the heart and the heartland." Why "early"? Because most of his current ideology now completely contradicts his past views. In other words, he was speaking out of his ass then AND now. In ten years time, he will prolly be a Chomsky-style anarchist. This buffoon has no core beliefs.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby slucero » Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:03 am

These fuckers seriously don't know who's doing what..

NSA admits listening to U.S. phone calls without warrants
June 15, 2013 4:39 PM PDT

National Security Agency discloses in secret Capitol Hill briefing that thousands of analysts can listen to domestic phone calls. That authorization appears to extend to e-mail and text messages too.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57589 ... -warrants/


The National Security Agency has acknowledged in a new classified briefing that it does not need court authorization to listen to domestic phone calls.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat, disclosed this week that during a secret briefing to members of Congress, he was told that the contents of a phone call could be accessed "simply based on an analyst deciding that."

If the NSA wants "to listen to the phone," an analyst's decision is sufficient, without any other legal authorization required, Nadler said he learned. "I was rather startled," said Nadler, an attorney and congressman who serves on the House Judiciary committee.

Not only does this disclosure shed more light on how the NSA's formidable eavesdropping apparatus works domestically, it also suggests the Justice Department has secretly interpreted federal surveillance law to permit thousands of low-ranking analysts to eavesdrop on phone calls.

Because the same legal standards that apply to phone calls also apply to e-mail messages, text messages, and instant messages, Nadler's disclosure indicates the NSA analysts could also access the contents of Internet communications without going before a court and seeking approval.

The disclosure appears to confirm some of the allegations made by Edward Snowden, a former NSA infrastructure analyst who leaked classified documents to the Guardian. Snowden said in a video interview that, while not all NSA analysts had this ability, he could from Hawaii "wiretap anyone from you or your accountant to a federal judge to even the president."

There are serious "constitutional problems" with this approach, said Kurt Opsahl, a senior staff attorney at the Electronic Frontier Foundation who has litigated warrantless wiretapping cases. "It epitomizes the problem of secret laws."

The NSA yesterday declined to comment to CNET. A representative said Nadler was not immediately available. (This is unrelated to last week's disclosure that the NSA is currently collecting records of the metadata of all domestic Verizon calls, but not the actual contents of the conversations.)
Image

Earlier reports have indicated that the NSA has the ability to record nearly all domestic and international phone calls -- in case an analyst needed to access the recordings in the future. A Wired magazine article last year disclosed that the NSA has established "listening posts" that allow the agency to collect and sift through billions of phone calls through a massive new data center in Utah, "whether they originate within the country or overseas." That includes not just metadata, but also the contents of the communications.

William Binney, a former NSA technical director who helped to modernize the agency's worldwide eavesdropping network, told the Daily Caller this week that the NSA records the phone calls of 500,000 to 1 million people who are on its so-called target list, and perhaps even more. "They look through these phone numbers and they target those and that's what they record," Binney said.

Brewster Kahle, a computer engineer who founded the Internet Archive, has vast experience storing large amounts of data. He created a spreadsheet this week estimating that the cost to store all domestic phone calls a year in cloud storage for data-mining purposes would be about $27 million per year, not counting the cost of extra security for a top-secret program and security clearances for the people involved.

NSA's annual budget is classified but is estimated to be around $10 billion.

Documents that came to light in an EFF lawsuit provide some insight into how the spy agency vacuums up data from telecommunications companies. Mark Klein, who worked as an AT&T technician for over 22 years, disclosed in 2006 (PDF) that he witnessed domestic voice and Internet traffic being surreptitiously "diverted" through a "splitter cabinet" to secure room 641A in one of the company's San Francisco facilities. The room was accessible only to NSA-cleared technicians.

AT&T and other telecommunications companies that allow the NSA to tap into their fiber links receive absolute immunity from civil liability or criminal prosecution, thanks to a law that Congress enacted in 2008 and renewed in 2012. It's a series of amendments to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, also known as the FISA Amendments Act.

That law says surveillance may be authorized by the attorney general and director of national intelligence without prior approval by the secret Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, as long as minimization requirements and general procedures blessed by the court are followed.

A requirement of the 2008 law is that the NSA "may not intentionally target any person known at the time of acquisition to be located in the United States." A possible interpretation of that language, some legal experts said, is that the agency may vacuum up everything it can domestically -- on the theory that indiscriminate data acquisition was not intended to "target" a specific American citizen.

Image

Rep. Nadler's disclosure that NSA analysts can listen to calls without court orders came during a House Judiciary hearing on Thursday that included FBI director Robert Mueller as a witness.

Mueller initially sought to downplay concerns about NSA surveillance by claiming that, to listen to a phone call, the government would need to seek "a special, a particularized order from the FISA court directed at that particular phone of that particular individual."

Is information about that procedure "classified in any way?" Nadler asked.

"I don't think so," Mueller replied.

"Then I can say the following," Nadler said. "We heard precisely the opposite at the briefing the other day. We heard precisely that you could get the specific information from that telephone simply based on an analyst deciding that...In other words, what you just said is incorrect. So there's a conflict."

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the head of the Senate Intelligence committee, separately acknowledged this week that the agency's analysts have the ability to access the "content of a call."

Image

Director of National Intelligence Michael McConnell indicated during a House Intelligence hearing in 2007 that the NSA's surveillance process involves "billions" of bulk communications being intercepted, analyzed, and incorporated into a database.

They can be accessed by an analyst who's part of the NSA's "workforce of thousands of people" who are "trained" annually in minimization procedures, he said. (McConnell, who had previously worked as the director of the NSA, is now vice chairman at Booz Allen Hamilton, Snowden's former employer.)

If it were "a U.S. person inside the United States, now that would stimulate the system to get a warrant," McConnell told the committee. "And that is how the process would work. Now, if you have foreign intelligence data, you publish it [inside the federal government]. Because it has foreign intelligence value."

McConnell said during a separate congressional appearance around the same time that he believed the president had the constitutional authority, no matter what the law actually says, to order domestic spying without warrants.

Former FBI counterterrorism agent Tim Clemente told CNN last month that, in national security investigations, the bureau can access records of a previously made telephone call. "All of that stuff is being captured as we speak whether we know it or like it or not," he said. Clemente added in an appearance the next day that, thanks to the "intelligence community" -- an apparent reference to the NSA -- "there's a way to look at digital communications in the past."

NSA Director Keith Alexander said this week that his agency's analysts abide by the law: "They do this lawfully. They take compliance oversight, protecting civil liberties and privacy and the security of this nation to their heart every day."

But that's not always the case. A New York Times article in 2009 revealed the NSA engaged in significant and systemic "overcollection" of Americans' domestic communications that alarmed intelligence officials. The Justice Department said in a statement at the time that it "took comprehensive steps to correct the situation and bring the program into compliance" with the law.

Jameel Jaffer, director of the ACLU's Center for Democracy, says he was surprised to see the 2008 FISA Amendments Act be used to vacuum up information on American citizens. "Everyone who voted for the statute thought it was about international communications," he said.


Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Memorex » Tue Jun 18, 2013 2:02 am

Now 50% of the population finds Obama untrustworthy. First off, that's still way too high for ANY politician in my book.

I hope people are realizing though that it's not Obama's policies, but rather the policy of the entire US Governmental apparatus. It's not Obama that is untrustworthy, it's the position of president, the office, that has become that way.

I have a high tolerance for secrecy by the government under the right circumstances. And I even have somewhat of a tolerance for what rights I can bend on, but we are so far past the line of what's ok it's ridiculous.

Does anyone believe that this NSA stuff has foiled dozens of plots? That's just stupid. Because there isn't much our government loves more than full court press when a plot is foiled.

As far as Snowden. I think he is a necessary evil. I do believe he is a traitor. I do believe he should be jailed for many years. But I am thrilled someone has the guts to reveal the horrible policies that our government is now drunk on. These types of policies do not have to be secret. They should be openly discussed. It wasn't for him to decide that, but I'm glad he did.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:17 am

Memorex wrote:Now 50% of the population finds Obama untrustworthy. First off, that's still way too high for ANY politician in my book.

I hope people are realizing though that it's not Obama's policies, but rather the policy of the entire US Governmental apparatus. It's not Obama that is untrustworthy.


Did you forget about how BOzo came into this presidency day after day, night after night, claiming he'd make it more transparent and all that other stuff that is completely opposite of what he's really doing? For this reason, he's just as guilty.
I've never eaten a piece of sushi I didn't thoroughly enjoy.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:23 am

slucero wrote:These fuckers seriously don't know who's doing what..
Image


This windbag is one of the big reasons America has become so fucked up in recent years.
I've never eaten a piece of sushi I didn't thoroughly enjoy.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Memorex » Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:44 am

The Sushi Hunter wrote:
Memorex wrote:Now 50% of the population finds Obama untrustworthy. First off, that's still way too high for ANY politician in my book.

I hope people are realizing though that it's not Obama's policies, but rather the policy of the entire US Governmental apparatus. It's not Obama that is untrustworthy.


Did you forget about how BOzo came into this presidency day after day, night after night, claiming he'd make it more transparent and all that other stuff that is completely opposite of what he's really doing? For this reason, he's just as guilty.


Yes. And Obama is even more guilty in the sense that at least some of the republicans said this stuff was fine all along. So Obama not only was against it (or said he was) but he made promises that he never kept. BUT - I don't think he has acted any differently than any other person would right now in his position. Because the American Public has went ahead and grabbed their ankles for government in general. And every single future president is going to take advantage of that until we no longer let them.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The Sushi Hunter » Tue Jun 18, 2013 7:43 am

The fact is BOzo won the election by promising to change the government in ways that remove the "evil sneaky lurking" Republicans, yet it's now being proven over and over again day in and day out that he and his pathetic freak show administration are exactly all these things....and more.

Clearly the weeks right before 2012 election, I remember the wife and I up in Starbuck's in San Fran. and a number of male barista's were wankering with each other while they work that if the Republicans won the election, the president would round them all up because they are homosexuals and kill them. Delusional!
I've never eaten a piece of sushi I didn't thoroughly enjoy.
User avatar
The Sushi Hunter
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 4881
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:54 am
Location: Hidden Valley, Japan

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Boomchild » Tue Jun 18, 2013 11:30 am

Pentagon to continue buying Russian helicopters for use in Afghanistan. Nice to see that the B.O. administration is so focused on "jobs, jobs, jobs". Of course the excuse is the U.S. military couldn't find any other manufacturer that could "meet the requirements". Somehow I find this to be a bullshit.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2 ... pter-deal/
"If the freedom of speech is taken away then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter." George Washington
User avatar
Boomchild
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 7129
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 6:10 pm
Location: Pennsylvania

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:48 pm

The Sushi Hunter wrote:The fact is BOzo won the election by promising to change the government in ways that remove the "evil sneaky lurking" Republicans,...


Actually, Obama won by running on the happy-feely narrative of healing red states and blue states. Of course, as soon as he proposed any legislation, it became the obvious that the GOP has no interest in governing. Not sure if Obama realizes that yet.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby slucero » Tue Jun 18, 2013 3:09 pm

Sen. Alan Grayson going off on the NSA...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffSD2zR ... =endscreen

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.


~Albert Einstein
User avatar
slucero
Compact Disc
 
Posts: 5444
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 1:17 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby Memorex » Tue Jun 18, 2013 3:19 pm

The_Noble_Cause wrote:
The Sushi Hunter wrote:The fact is BOzo won the election by promising to change the government in ways that remove the "evil sneaky lurking" Republicans,...


Actually, Obama won by running on the happy-feely narrative of healing red states and blue states. Of course, as soon as he proposed any legislation, it became the obvious that the GOP has no interest in governing. Not sure if Obama realizes that yet.


This always makes me laugh. It's obstructionism when the Republicans say no to Democrats, but it's ok when the Dems don't do what the Republicans want. It's governing to slam unpopular (and sometimes destructive) policies down the throats of Americans, but if anyone tries to stop that, it's wrong.

I agree that the Republicans have been difficult, but sometimes I appreciate that. Sometimes I don't. But I don't see them as acting any differently than Democrats.

A president now needs to realize that the country is divided and they should never assume that both sides will ever play nice again. The Dems have been just as dirty and in some cases, worse.
User avatar
Memorex
Stereo LP
 
Posts: 3570
Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2006 1:30 pm

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby steveo777 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:09 pm

slucero wrote:Sen. Alan Grayson going off on the NSA...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ffSD2zR ... =endscreen


This guy is a Dem. Sadly, most aren't going to listen to what he has to say. There are too many heads buried in the sand and right now about 48%'s give a damn is either broken or stoned.....or the dead voted. ;)
User avatar
steveo777
MP3
 
Posts: 11311
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 12:15 pm
Location: Citrus Heights, Ca

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Wed Jun 19, 2013 12:45 am

Memorex wrote:This always makes me laugh. It's obstructionism when the Republicans say no to Democrats, but it's ok when the Dems don't do what the Republicans want.


You can laugh all you want. What you're talking about is a totally different issue. Obama did NOT win by promising to remove "evil slippery lurking Republicans" or whatever the hell Sushi Hunter says. Just how many psychotropic drugs is this guy on? Isn't it the responsibility of his fellow conservative bros. to point out that he is fucking insane? Obama won by making naive promises of resolving partisan gridlock.

Memorex wrote:It's governing to slam unpopular (and sometimes destructive) policies down the throats of Americans, but if anyone tries to stop that, it's wrong.


Depends on the policy. You mean like Iraq, where we invaded despite the weapons Inspectors requesting more time? How about Medicare Part D, where the GOP actually turned off the CSPAN cameras so we couldn't see who was voting? Obamacare, on the other hand, was the culmination of close to 100 years worth of bi-partisan struggle and compromise and deserved to be passed. Good for Obama and Nancy Pelosi. They can't help it if the modern GOP has turned into little more than Roger Aile's personal advertising firm.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:53 am

steveo777 wrote:Glen Beck supposedly really has something this time. News within 24 hours that will bring down the entire power structure. The whistleblower claims he is "dead".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl ... Qkd0J58HAE


Still waiting on this big revelation....
Not sure why this guy has any fans left. He has pulled this stunt repeatedly.
Total plagiarist, snake salesman, hack, flim-flam artist.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

Re: President Barack Obama - My what big ears you have!

Postby The_Noble_Cause » Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:55 am

Boomchild wrote:And when the government checks and benefits run out, you can be sure they will be blaming Bush or the Republican party for it. It won't be their good buddy Barry.


Kinda like the GOP blaming Obama for starting the erosion of our cherished civil liberties. You guys are hilarious.
"I think we should all sue this women for depriving us of our God given right to go down with a clear mind, and good thoughts." - Stu, Consumate Pussy Eater
User avatar
The_Noble_Cause
Super Audio CD
 
Posts: 16055
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 9:14 am
Location: Lake Titicaca

PreviousNext

Return to Snowmobiles For The Sahara

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests