Free Fire Zone ~ April 09

Written by Christianity and the Confusion on April 1st, 2009

   This is the Free Fire Zone message board for April . The previous ones can be found by using the search engine located below the Google/dictionary box, by doing a search of “Free Fire Zone” you will be able to see all previous ones.  Feel free to reply to any post there or restart the thread here.

 


    This message board is for posting what ever you like. If you notice that some pages are missing try looking in the Archives. Some may find this page useful when their regular boards are not working. Here all are welcome, after registering you will be able to post. To start a new thread click on the Post a comment you can gave that thread a title by replacing the Free Fire Zone with your title. Enjoy this board and remember no personal insults.


 

80 Comments so far ↓

  1. Anonymous says:

    I think that all taxes should be repealed so that the nation's wealth stays in the hands of the citizens of the nation because I have this really silly idea that I and everyone else IS the rightful owner of my own wealth and money.

  2. Anonymous says:

    Granted…I don't believe in the Democrats version over what is considered “fair share” as regards taxes..but how would you suggest running the government without any taxes?

  3. Anonymous says:

    How about a bake sale?
    Just kidding…
    I didn't mean all taxes because we need them to run the govt but I think taxes should cost the average person about 1% of our total income. That sound silly but I bet it can be done if we force our govts to do it.

  4. Anonymous says:

    I'm scratching my head right now because you have offered a contradiction within your statement. There is no such thing as “the nation's” wealth to be taken or returned, and yet you automatically give it legitimacy, and discuss it, as a thing to be owned by a group of people.
    Get the entire notion of “the nation's” anything out of your head when you really want to join the rest of us in the ranks of the extremely irate. See that phrase for what it really means: serfdom.
    Boo serfdom. A man should get what he earns, and nothing less.
    Blondie, the problem I have with our taxation is that it is a completely involuntary process. Take the taxes in a sales tax, at the register, and give the industrious individuals a choice between paying them, or doing for themselves.

  5. Anonymous says:

    I guess you got a point there about “the nation's wealth” but I was using that particular expression that the left likes to use to make a point about it being the person(s) property in the first place.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Volunteerism, or we simply get rid of the federal government all together, and stick with the original state governments. Hell we could have both, States could pay for their own delegation and pony up the money in times of war.
    This is however right now the most ideal way to hit the feds, refuses to pay taxes, routing all taxation thou the state as to enable the state to cut off or reduce funding to the federal government makes federal blackmail of the states into extra-constitutional territory less feasible.
    That in turn because people can freely move between states forces the states to behave fairly or end up like California in a pinch, with all their oppressed Economic minority with wealth leaving.
    On net that's probably the best explanation as to why most state government are so much more efferent and lower cost than the federal government despite the fact that they do so much more that requires money.

  7. Anonymous says:

    Yeah, if there aren't any taxes who is going to pay off the Bush debt?

  8. Anonymous says:

    By Moondog
    Volunteerism, or we simply get rid of the federal government all together, and stick with the original state governments. Hell we could have both, States could pay for their own delegation and pony up the money in times of war.

    If we are going to go back to how our government was suppose to run we have to follow the Constitution.

    We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

    And how are you going to do all that without taxes?

  9. Anonymous says:

    I just had to say how much I like the new intro video.

  10. Anonymous says:

    You're right Jess, but today's Republican Party only wants to protect the very rich. They would like to forget that part of the Constitution that says the government's job is to “Promote the general Welfare.”

  11. Anonymous says:

    A gunman opened fire on a center where immigrants were taking a citizenship exam Friday in downtown Binghamton, killing 13 people before apparently committing suicide.
    The suspected gunman carried identification with the name of 42-year-old Jiverly Voong of nearby Johnson City, N.Y., a law enforcement official said.
    But the name is an alias that the man has used in the past, said the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly and was talking on condition of anonymity.
    “It obviously was premeditated,” said Binghamton Police Chief Joseph Zikuski, noting the gunman blocked the rear exit with his car. “He made sure nobody could escape.”

    Click on video below to see the News Report.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Each time I see something like this in the news my heart sinks. I just don't know why or how someone can with such ease kill. There has to be something that our society is doing that this type of thing keeps happening.

  13. Anonymous says:

    The General Welfare
    Perhaps no phrase found in the Constitution has been more distorted in actual use and application than the provision that one broad purpose of our government is to promote the general welfare throughout the United States. The Constitution's Article I, Section 8, assigns Congress the “power to lay and collect taxes … to pay the debts and provide for the … general welfare of the United States.” Certainly, if the Founders had meant this purpose to include any action that might possibly benefit citizens generally, the Constitution itself could have been limited to this solitary statement. Justice, defense, and liberty, after all, are of good effect on the general welfare of the nation as a whole.
    But the Founders also ratified the Constitution's 10th Amendment, affirming, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” Thus, the general welfare cannot reasonably be stretched to allow the national level of government to perform functions and exercise powers beyond those specifically and explicitly listed in the Constitution. As James Madison described the limitations on interpretation of the general welfare clause, “If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the general welfare, the government is no longer a limited one….” You can read more if you click on this link
    http://reagan2020.us/platform/the_general_welfare.asp

  14. Anonymous says:

    Members of Congress have incorrectly cited the general welfare clause as justification for legislation in matters concerning health care, education (including loans to students), agriculture, foreign aid, and domestic crimes, all of which are better left to those closest to the underlying problems.

    There was nothing but spin on that site, it's the same garbage that has destroyed our economy. Someone should tell those Federalists that their party went extinct almost two hundred years ago. The American People and the Founding Fathers did not support this thinking for the most part. Most followed the leadership of Thomas Jefferson who founded the Democratic Party. Benjamin Franklin's statement, “We must all hang together, gentlemen…else, we shall most assuredly hang separately” was made at the signing of the Declaration of Independence and meant that if they did not band together in the fight against the British, they would all be hanged separately. Our Nation was founded on the concept of community, that's why the Founders wrote the words to promote the general welfare. Even with that today's conservative want to throw out all protection for the American people.

    We New Federalists favor movements toward the maximum levels of freedom in economic exchanges, and concomitant noninterference by government…left for citizens to secure themselves, through private efforts or through programs at lower levels of government. We therefore favor elimination of congressional action in regard to all matters on which the Constitution is silent, including the following subjects not specifically mentioned in the Constitution: aid to specific industries such as agriculture, education (including student loans), energy (except insofar as related to the common defense), the environment, health care, and pensions. However, as the nation has extracted money from taxpayers in exchange for promises of health care (such as Medicare) and pension benefits (including Social Security programs), in the process preventing citizens from using those funds in accord with their own free decisions concerning their personal welfare, we strongly support continuing these programs for current recipients while gradually transferring responsibility for such programs back to the citizens themselves.

    They hate having the government regulating their businesses, but if there weren't any regulations, slavery would be legal, along with child labor, poison air and water. Regulations are what keep the American people safe and it's the duty of the government to provide for the general welfare of all the people.

  15. Anonymous says:

       I do not buy tabloids but this one was tempting. I just could not bring myself to buy this, but I found myself wondering how many people would find this story interesting. I would think that both Liberals and Conservatives might want to know more about this tale. This is why I think we will see this story retold and retold.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Muslim schools continue to improve in their GCSE results. For the third consecutive year Muslim schools advanced on their previous results and surpassed the national average. The reason is that there is a positive co-relation between a Muslim school and a Muslim home. Muslim children develop self-confidence and self-esteem and they do not suffer from Idenbtity Crises.
    Muslim schools provide an outstanding standard of education for a couple of thousands young children across the country.Ex-pupils of Muslim schools have developed into examplary citizens and participate in all aspects of civic society. Independent analysis and thorough OFSTED inspections have demonstrated that academic achievement, behaviour, social and emotional development in Muslim schools is consistently and subtantially better than local and national averages. Higher standard meant that an increasing number of Muslim parents choose to enrol their children in a Muslim school. There is a dire need for more state funded Muslim schools and the only solution is that those state and Church schools where Muslim children are in majority, may be designated as Muslim community schools.
    Muslim parents would like their children to learn and be well versed in standard English to follow the National Curriculum and go for higher studies and research to serve humanity. But majority of Muslim children leave schools with low grades because monolingual teachers are not capable of teaching English to bilingual children. At the same time Muslim children need to be well versed in Arabic, Urdu and other community languages to keep in touch with their cultural roots and enjoy the beauty of their literature and poetry. They leave schools without learning such languages. If you ignore or neglect the mother tongue of a child , he is not going to learn a second language. Bilingualism is an asset but the British schooling percieves it as a problem. Therefore, it is crucial that Muslim children must have their own state funded Muslim schools with bilingual Muslim teachers as role models during their developmental periods, otherwise, they will keep on suffering academically, socially, emotionally and spiritually. In all western countries, each and every Muslim child must be in a state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers.
    A 13 years old Pakistani girl has written a 760 pages novel in English and was honoured by the President of Pakistan. She is well versed in Urdu and English because she has bilingual teachers who are well versed in Urdu as well as in English.
    Iftikhar Ahmad
    http://www.londonschoolofislamics.org.uk/Default.asp

  17. Anonymous says:

    Clearly you are suffering from hysteria …
    “In all western countries, each and every Muslim child must be in a state funded Muslim schools with Muslim teachers.”
    I would suggest you see a doctor. When any non-American can dictate to America … you will get our H-bomb answer. What we must avoid, is putting ourselves in the position of a suppliant … oops … too late!
    Shalom

  18. Anonymous says:

    Religious schools

    I have no problem with religious schools privately funded (not government funded). People should have a right to send their children to schools that teach aspects of their culture and religion. I have no problem with Catholic, Fundamentalist, Anglican, Hebrew, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, Pagan, or Humanist schools that present their principles to voluntary children/parents.

    Here are the limits that I would insist upon to avoid my vigorous opposition.

    1. Schools should NOT teach hatred against those of different or no religions.

    2. Schools should NOT advocate or train children in use of weapons and war tactics.

    3. Schools should NOT teach opposition, revolution, overthrow of the Nation in which they are located.

    4. Schools should be fined or closed if they advocate universally accepted immorality. That includes men/boys physically striking women/girls, gender hatred and segregation, killing of innocent non-combattants or infidels, banning certain dress based on religious superstition (Barqas). Suicide bombing of non-combattants praised by a school should lead to the school's closure, and imprisonment of the principal.

    5. Taxpayer money should not be given to any religious schools Christian, Muslim or otherwise. Funding should be by private individuals, established charities, or the parent religious organisation, church, or mosque.

    6. Schools should teach tolerance of other religions and non-theisms by fellow citizens of their country.

    7. Schools should only be certified as accredited if they teach modern science, advanced math, and balanced world history. Religious dogma and mythology can be taught if separate from science classes.

    Amergin

  19. Anonymous says:

    Why shouldn't tax dollars go to Christian schools, after all this is a Christian nation and was founded on Christian principles?

  20. Anonymous says:

    I received this email from NARAL and all I could keep thinking was what happen to an up of down vote on Judges that Republicans chatted during the Bush years?

    Anti-choice members of the Senate are threatening to filibuster some of President Obama’s high-profile nominees simply because they have taken pro-choice positions. They have even signed their names to a letter committing to oppose any judge who wasn’t a nominee of George W. Bush.
    The use of the “f” word—filibuster—when referring to any of these nominees is ridiculous. We won’t let this threat go unanswered. We need your support to call on the U.S. Senate to confirm the following highly qualified nominees:

    Judge David Hamilton for a federal appeals court position, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius as secretary of Health and Human Services, and Prof. Dawn Johnsen, a former legal director for NARAL Pro-Choice America, for a key post at the Justice Department.
    Call our supporters in key states such as Pennsylvania and Maine to lobby lawmakers such as Sens. Specter, Casey, Snowe, and Collins to confirm these highly qualified nominees.
    Contact senators nationwide to solidify their commitment to confirmation.
    Lobby senators and their staff on Capitol Hill office by office. Educate them about the excellent qualifications of each of these three nominees to ensure the votes of pro-choice allies and secure the votes of key senators we need to confirm these nominees.
    Conduct a full-court press with the media to let them know Americans won’t stand for obstructing President Obama’s nominees and that our one-million-strong network will do everything it can to ensure confirmation of these highly qualified nominees.

    Each of these nominees matters. If anti-choice forces succeed in blocking any of these appointments, they will be emboldened to continue obstructing more and more. And of course it all leads up to the battle over the Supreme Court.

  21. Anonymous says:

    What makes this a Christian Nation? I don't think that murdering millions of innocent Iraqis is very Christian. I don't think that keeping large numbers of the population in poverty is Christian. and on and on.

  22. Anonymous says:

    The U.S. went 15 years without a federal tax increase

    By KARL ROVE
    Yesterday was Tax Day, and it was marked by large numbers of Americans turning out for an estimated 2,000 tea parties across the country. This movement is significant.
    In 1978, California voters enacted Prop. 13 in reaction to steep property taxes. That marked the start of a tax-cutting movement that culminated in Ronald Reagan slashing high national income taxes in the 1980s. Now Americans are reacting to runaway government spending that they were not told about before last year's election, and which Americans are growing to resent.
    Derided by elitists as phony, the tea-party movement is spontaneous, decentralized, frequently amateurish and sometimes shrill. If it has a father it is CNBC's Rick Santelli, who called for holding a tea party in Chicago on July 4. Yesterday's gatherings were made up of people who may never meet again (there's no central collection point for email addresses). But the concerns driving people to tea parties are real, growing and powerful. Politicians ignore them at their peril.
    One concern is the rise of state and local taxes. New York and California passed multibillion-dollar tax increases this year. Other states are considering significant tax hikes or have enacted tax increases in recent years. The many tax and fee increases enacted or under consideration is angering voters.
    If that anger persists, it may give Republicans a leg up in the 38 gubernatorial elections over the next two years, as well as in key state legislative races that will determine which party redraws congressional and state legislative districts after the 2010 census. Expect voters to hear a lot about jobs being created in low-tax states in the coming years.
    But the center of the debate is in Washington, not the states. The fear of future federal tax hikes is fueling the tea-party movement.
    This is an important development. In 2008, voters were less worried about taxes than they had been in previous elections. Why? Because the 15 years between President Bill Clinton's 1993 tax hike and Barack Obama's increase in cigarette taxes in February was the longest stretch in U.S. history without a federal tax increase. President George W. Bush's tax cuts also cut 13 million people on the lower-end of the income scale from the income tax rolls — people who don't pay taxes aren't worried about the tax burden.
    So far, Mr. Obama has decided to let the Bush tax cuts expire in 2011 and avoid forcing Democrats to take a tough vote. But the tea parties reveal how hard it will be for the president to hide the Democrats' tax-and-spend tendencies from voters.
    Mr. Obama plans to boost federal spending 25% while nearly tripling the national debt over 10 years. Americans know that this kind of spending will have economic consequences, including new taxes being imposed by the new progressives.
    It hasn't gotten a ton of attention, but people are fed up with the complexity of their tax code and ready to do something about it. The Tax Foundation's 2009 Annual Tax Attitudes (which was conducted Feb. 18-27, by Harris) shows us that many Americans are willing to trade popular deductions for lower rates and a simpler code. There's also been a flurry of interest among Americans in replacing the current system with a national sales tax or a flat tax.
    The open question is whether Republicans will be boosted by the nascent tea-party movement. House Republicans smartly offered a proposed spending plan this year that would freeze nondefense discretionary spending, suspend earmarks for five years, and reform entitlements. But cutting spending won't be enough. Taxes matter — and will matter more in the coming years.
    The 2009 Tax Foundation survey found that Americans believe that taxes should, on average, take just 15.6% of a person's wages. And 88% of Americans in the same poll believe that there should be a cap on all federal, state, and local taxes of 29% or less — there is still a constituency out there that will favor tax cutting politicians.
    But to tap into that constituency Republicans will have to link lower taxes to money in voters' pockets, and economic growth and jobs. They must explain why the GOP approach will lead to greater prosperity. Such arguments are not self-executing. They require leaders to make them, time and again, as Reagan once did.
    Some liberals believe that the recession has made tax-and-spend issues passé. But political movements are often a reaction against aggressive overreach by those in power. Mr. Obama's response to the financial crisis — a government power grab and budget explosion — has put spending and taxes back on the front burner. The tea parties are an early manifestation of that. More is sure to follow.
    Mr. Rove is the former senior adviser and deputy chief of staff to President George W. Bush.
    The Wall Street Journal/Opinion
    ——————————————————————
    I thought that you would all like to see that whole article. Sorry if some of you think of Rove as if he is the Devil himself.

  23. Anonymous says:

  24. Anonymous says:

       I cannot believe that these people are still trying this old trick, you would think that these scammers would try something new. I just got this e-mail:

    YANG LIM & ASSOCIATES SOLICITOR AND ADVOCATES NO. 101, JALAN PUDU RAYA, TAMAN DESA RAYA MALAYSIA I am Barrister Yang Lim , an attorney at law. I discovered your email and information through internet search so I decided to contact you. A deceased client of mine, that shares the same last name as yours died as the result of a heart-related condition on March 12th 2005. His heart condition was due to the death of all the members of his family in the tsunami disaster on the 26th December 2004 in Sumatra Indonesia. And in the record there is no known successor to this deposit of the deceased who died without a will. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_Indian_Ocean_earthquake. I have contacted you to assist in distributing the money left behind by my client before it is confiscated or declared unserviceable by the bank where this deposit valued at Eighteen million dollars is (US$18million dollars) lodged. This bank has issued me a notice to contact the next of kin, I can be reached on (yanglim8@gmail.com) for more information. Best regards, Yang Lim Attorney at Law.

  25. Anonymous says:

    BO said that he is creating Americore or some bull like that and is telling everyone that service is good and we have to do it to have meaningful citizenships. So is he saying in order to be a good citizen we have to serve the govt's interest?
    In my opinion, you are creating an entire batch of citizens who believe their entire existance as a citizen revolves around service to the country. Now the govt has a group of citizens that will do its bidding in the name of the govt, country, and nation.
    I would like to break this chain-thought right now by saying that the only person I have to serve is me and my interest and the govt better understand that it exist to serve me and not the other way around.

  26. Anonymous says:

    So is he saying in order to be a good citizen we have to serve the govt's interest?


    Government should serve the common interest.

  27. Anonymous says:

    Government should serve the common interest.


    So what happens when my individual interest gets in the way of the common interest?

  28. Anonymous says:

    So what happens when my individual interest gets in the way of the common interest?


    A fairly represented common interest?
    Please define “individual interest” and “common interest” to make sure we're using the same terms.

  29. Anonymous says:

    Facism

    Communism

    Socialism

     

    What ever you call it  –  Obama's “G D America'” policies are well under way.

    Hold on tight ……  We're in for a bumpy ride.

     

  30. Anonymous says:

       In debates over Capital Punishment Liberals will often say of the quote, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” that if such thinking was followed to it's logical conclusion, the world would be blind and toothless. Liberals are the first to say that we should turn the other cheek and only fight as a last resort. So, it bothers me when so many have a blood lust when it comes to the last administration. For me, it is enough to know that for all there will be a day of reckoning.

       As a Nation we are faced with so many troubles that will go unsolved if we wasted our time fighting. Given the choice between seeing men like Rove and Cheney behind bars or seeing the Country's economy thriving with healthcare for all, I will take the latter. Yes, we do need to resolve what was done in our name. The world must realize that we will never again use torture, but will pursuing a vendetta against the last administration help or hinder that. I think if we want a bloodbath that will be all that we will get. We will change nothing and one day, we will repeat all the same crimes. What is more, our economy will go into the toilet and the healthcare crisis will become even worse. So, I ask you, what do you really want?

  31. Anonymous says:

    The typical Anti-Liberal Rant

     In debates over Capital Punishment Liberals will often say of the quote, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” that if such thinking was followed to it's logical conclusion, the world would be blind and toothless.

    I am a passionate Liberal and Libertarian, and I have never said that. You give knee jerk response to a more complicated issue. I have no problem with Capital Punishment if the system proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that the defendant truly murdered someone. If evidence including DNA or other firm facts prove guilt. I am OK with execution. I would probable not execute any of the hundreds of thousands convicted on circumstantial evidence or eye-witness testimony alone. The US Judicial System had tonnes of evidence against O.J. Simpson but he was NOT convicted. US Justice is too sloppy to have a blanket rule executing the convicts. I have no opposition to the executions of Ted Bundy and other clearly guilty killers. I also know that in history (in USA) thousands if not a million black men have been hung on fake charges by Racist Conservatives.

    Liberals are the first to say that we should turn the other cheek

    That Liberal was named Jesus Christ.

    and only fight as a last resort.

    It is moral to view war as a last resort. Leaders who resort to negotiation, sanctions and other measures before sending other peoples children to fight and die are wise.

    So, it bothers me when so many have a blood lust when it comes to the last administration. For me, it is enough to know that for all there will be a day of reckoning.

    I think justice would call for hanging or Life Imprisonment for any national leader who sends young men and women to fight a war for economic or political goals is a MURDERER. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, Milosevic, Saddam, Osama Bin Ladin, and George W. Bush all started unprovoked and illicit wars resulting in the unnecessary and wrongful deaths of thousands of their own soldiers and hundreds of thousands of civilians in the attacked countries. I think the USA is guilty of protecting murderers if it fails to turn over Bush for his unprovoked military war of aggression against the Iraqi People under the excuse of eliminating its nasty dictator.

    Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld should be turned over to the International Court for War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity (including torture of POW's). It seems wrong to convict Slobodan Milosevic and not George W. Bush.

    As a Nation we are faced with so many troubles that will go unsolved if we wasted our time fighting.

    You are still wasting your time and the lives of your bravest and best young Americans in wars that could have been avoided. The Afghan War could be justified because Osama bin Ladin had refuge there. You trapped him twice and each time let him escape to Pakistan. You know better than to attack and destabilise Pakistan and so have conceded Afghanistan to the Taleban. Meanwhile you attacked a country that did not attack you, killed 130,000 to 250,000 civilians, stirred up sectarian civil war and the reason was personal Bush vendetta against Husseine and desire to control Oil reserves. All was a dismal failure. Bush killed 4000 or more young Americans for his greed, ego, and stupidity.

    Given the choice between seeing men like Rove and Cheney behind bars or seeing the Country's economy thriving with healthcare for all, I will take the latter. Yes, we do need to resolve what was done in our name. The world must realize that we will never again use torture, but will pursuing a vendetta against the last administration help or hinder that.

    Bringing bloody homicidal criminals to justice is not a vendetta. It is JUSTICE. Bush, Cheney, and the entire Fascist Cabal who promoted his anti-freedom decrees and international irresponsibility calls out for JUSTICE. You should not fail to prosecute these jingoistic pro-Totalitarian Republicans (aka Fascists) who committed horrible crimes and mass murder.

    I think if we want a bloodbath that will be all that we will get.

     Are you saying that if you convict War Criminals you will get a bloodbath? Why? Will American Fascists, Neo-nazis, Racists, and other right wing extremists will start a bloody insurrection to overthrow President Obama? Well if the Right Wingers start and insurrection, I hope you use lethal force to eliminate them.

    We will change nothing and one day, we will repeat all the same crimes.

    So, by your theory, it is a waste of time to execute murderers because people will continue to murder.

    What is more, our economy will go into the toilet and the healthcare crisis will become even worse. So, I ask you, what do you really want?

    Amergin: That is a totally separate issue. I am not going to tell you how you want to have health care. If you want to insure everyone like the First World Countries do, that is your choice. If you want to make health care a purchased commodity and you can have it if you can afford it, that is your right. If 50 million American's do not get adequate health care or any health care, that is your responsibility not mine. I am happy with my tax supported universal health care system. You can go on to your Social Darwinism, survival of the wealthy and near wealthy, and let the poor be economically selected for extinction.

    Your economy may fail. And I hope it does not because many good Americans and children will suffer. Your wealthy class will ride it out and say to the sick and elderly, treat your cancer with herbal Ash tree leaves while the rich go to Mayo.

    Amergin

  32. Anonymous says:

    I don't think he's going to have the apocalyptic effect most do. He's Clinton II. Yes, he'll leave a recession waiting 15 years later… and if Republicans are smart, they won't take office during that time. Let the Dems get blamed for their own mess.

  33. Anonymous says:

       Let me begin by saying that I am a Liberal and my point is not that we should turn our backs on the crimes but rather that we have our priorities in order. If we are consumed by the desire for a vendetta so that it blinds us to all other things, that will be all that we get. I am all for the appointment of a good Independent Prosecutor, who can behind the scenes pursue justice. This would allow Congress to address what is harming most Americans, poverty, hunger, homelessness, and sickness. As a Liberal and a Christian these types of things matter more to me than revenge for the wrongs that may have been done. Yes, I want justice, but not if it kills all hope for healthcare for all, not if stop recovery work that will save us for another great depression. You see, we can become so consumed with our desire for justice that it actually becomes a vendetta. Think about it, if we put Bush and Cheney on trial, do you think that any work would get done on the economy, healthcare, or the environment? So, let an IP investigate all things, but for the next two years lets fix what is really broken and then when the IP has all his facts the trial can begin.

  34. Anonymous says:

    I agrees with you !!!
    The Clinton admisistration planted the seeds for the current Recession by letting Barney Frank and Sen. Dodd mess with the Housing Industry.
    Now Obama is planting seeds for future Recessions.
    He's doubled the National Debt.
    They're making thier own bed – let them lay in it.

  35. Anonymous says:

    No matter what happens regarding the last administration, those responsible for justice are not the same officials as those responsible for healthcare. I really do not believe the money would come out of healthcare any more than the investigation of Clinton, or back further, of Nixon, decimated our healthcare. Our economy also has far less to do with how people feel about the last adminstration, even worldwide, than it has to do with how we have chosen to allocate funds and continue to allocate them. When Clinton was investigated, made to testify on television, and impeached all while IN office, it did not destroy our economy.
    I think in your wish to avoid more pain being added to the pain we have now, you may be trying to justify your feelings in some sort of concrete way. That it would be financially ruinous, rather than that it would be emotionally ruinous for America. If that is how you feel, you don't need to project into the future about the economic effects, my friend. It is perfectly acceptable to say “It would make a bad situation worse.” or “It would cause emotional agony in America, like Watergate did.” It is also perfectly alright to say what you said, that you are content knowing someday there will be a day of reckoning.
    Thing is, not everyone believes in that day of reckoning after we die. Many do not. Because they cannot find their contentment where you do, those people probably will not be content to let a God many of them do not believe in take care of it in the afterlife. Their feelings count, too.
    I do not have an answer as to what we should do. I have not convicted people who have not yet been tried in a court of law. Whenever there is sufficient evidence of wrongdoing, then I support a trial, just as I support a trial for any crime. I do not however support a lynching any more than you do.
    A trial is not a bloodbath. Iraq is a bloodbath. I want to see our soldiers come home, and I also want to see that we do what little we can to leave Iraq capable of rebuilding their infrastructure and society. There may not be much we can do. It is possible trials of our past leaders might help them heal over there, but only if they are convicted. In an ideal world, that would not affect the trials. It is also possible convictions wouldn't help with healing or closure either here or in the rest of the world, and might cause more violence.
    I wish I thought letting Rove and Cheney go in peace would lead to “the Country's economy thriving with healthcare for all.” but I see absolutely no likely causality there. Our nation has never had healthcare for all. I doubt that whatever we do about them will change that. If you visit Ross Perot's site and look at his figures, you will see how much we need to cut in order to maintain what healthcare and social security we have now. You will see where the money has been going. Then you can figure out what we need to sacrifice for the goal of universal healthcare. It is not difficult. I have done it. The problem is, most of us won't agree on what needs to go. Any investigations or trials of the past administration, though, would be in the noise. Go see for yourself.
    What do I really want? On the legal level, I want national and international law to be upheld. If there are trials, I want fair trials. No show trials, no kangaroo courts. On the personal level, I want closure and healing for as many people as possible, but not at the expense of injustice in EITHER direction.

  36. Anonymous says:

    When I said this:
    “No matter what happens regarding the last administration, those responsible for justice are not the same officials as those responsible for healthcare.”
    I was somewhat unclear there. What I was trying to express in response to your remark about wasting our time fighting and being unable to solve anything is that I disagree that fighting over one thing necessarily causes everything else to grind to a halt. Those working to provide better healthcare solutions would surely not drop what they were doing and stare glassy eyed at a TV screen until it was all over. They would keep working. Everyone who still has a job would keep working just like usual. Disruption at most would be limited to an hour here and there when there might be significant announcements.

  37. Anonymous says:

    Distraction of folks from listening to Rush might be good, but I am afraid they would just listen to him even more intently, in addition to watching the show trials.
    Shalom

  38. Anonymous says:

    To Marty
    Unfortunately you are more right than wrong I am so sorry that the US and GB have misled the world so badly for the last 29 years … it was a dirty job, but someone had to do it ;-(
    Shalom

  39. Anonymous says:

    To Mirage
    Very well written. If my neighbor kills someone, his trial is ordinary. If a politician kills someone, his trial is political, even if he is guilty in any ordinary sense, rather than in some extraordinary political sense.
    We can have any number of things from our government, but we can't have everything. Americans want everything … and so we aren't going to get what we want.
    I think Marty's point isn't the amount of money involved, it is that a show trial for Bush etal will be the causus belli for their supporters, to hold hostage, any healthcare improvements, that might have otherwise happened. I think Marty is wrong about that .. the Republicans are against all public support of healthcare, including Medicare and Medicaid. They have been since 1965. Whether there is a show trial or not, the Republicans will oppose any increased public support of healthcare.
    We must always beware of asking for justice. America is not a dream, it is a real hell, where 5% of humanity consumes 25% of the world. With justice, we would have an 80% reduction in standard of living, we would be like India or China.
    Shalom

  40. Anonymous says:

    To Marty

    Let me begin by saying that I am…

    I don't think you will find disagreement here since I don't know any vendetta liberals who post here ;-). I am very conservative myself, and I can fantasize vendettas, but I am not Italian enough to execute them (but my ex is partly from Sicily, so don't go there ;-).
    The big picture and the long run, are where the common good is, but there is hardly anyone one on Earth concerned with that, particularly in economically or violence challenged areas. Survival requires the small picture and the short run.
    Shalom

  41. Anonymous says:

    Matt Bors
    http://news.yahoo.com/comics/mattbors;_ylt=Ag8WqjuXF5mi.fVMwE8vJCoA35Z4
    Definitely puts one of our current problems in perspective 😉
    Shalom

  42. Anonymous says:

    Too many cookies on the plate the last administration left so many problems, some of their creation (diplomacy and torture), some bipartisan (war on terror and financial mess), some way bigger (global warming … however it is being caused) … it will take a genius to make any headway, because they are hitting at the same time and are interrelated. Pray.
    It would be fun to get all self righteous, but since Obama works for the same folks as Bush Jr … don't expect any Soviet style show trials. With Cheney's right wing death squad, the Democrats stayed sufficiently in line. Maybe Obama needs to continue that as a left wing death squad … just to get Rush to shut up!
    Shalom

  43. Anonymous says:

    So what happens when my individual interest gets in the way of the common interest?

    A fairly represented common interest? Please define “individual interest” and “common interest” to make sure we're using the same terms.

    I'll define individual interest as anything I would like to do but you should define common interest since you are the one that brought it up.

  44. Anonymous says:

    OK, I agree that the economy and our current quagmire wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and ?Pakistan should be dealt with first. I misunderstood your argument. My apologies.

    Amergin

  45. Anonymous says:

    I am all for the appointment of a good Independent Prosecutor, who can behind the scenes pursue justice.


    In this case, we've had way more than enough “behind the scenes” already. It's part of why we are in the mess we are in now.

  46. Anonymous says:

    Criminals never act in the light and per the seven cardinal sins, all are criminal … confession to a priest or not. The 6000 ultrarich/powerful/famous … do think they own you and me, and they will put us in the cattle cars eventually … they always do … Ireland long before Poland.
    Shalom

  47. Anonymous says:

    before the Donkeys try and remove the speck from the Elephant's eye….they need to remove the log from theirs………..sai ram……

  48. Anonymous says:

    Partisan are we? Neither is innocent, since the real problem is more systemic than parochial. So with partisanship, the same committee that really runs everything (badly) can still do their dirty work. Bi-partisanship is almost as bad, since that just means they agree on how to implement the Illuminati agenda. Only trans-partisanship will work … seeking the common good, and doing that, even if the Kissengers of the world don't like it.
    Shalom

  49. Anonymous says:

    I dislike both Parties…..they have both led us astray………Moses wandering in the dessert for 40 years was better suited to lead than these knuckleheads in Congress….of both Parties…………..sai ram

  50. Anonymous says:

    perhaps we need to lock Rush and Speaker Bela Pelosi in the same room until until they see eye to eye on things…….that should do it……..:)……sai ram

  51. Anonymous says:

    Irkle wrote
    The Clinton admisistration planted the seeds for the current Recession by letting Barney Frank and Sen. Dodd mess with the Housing Industry. Now Obama is planting seeds for future Recessions.


    I agree. The Clinton administration did a number of questionable things that were subtle enough that we didn't suffer the effects until long after the artful dodger had left office.

  52. Anonymous says:

    Man, I am so sick of the wishy washy conservatives in the media…
    You know, last week, and even more so the week before during the Tea Parties, all we heard was the conservative principles of “limited government”, “cut spending”, and “reduce taxes”. Today, they're talking about Obama “rolling the dice with our safety” because he isn't screening people getting off planes from Mexico. The pundits are up in arms that Obama hasn't done anything drastic to fix the problem!
    I am so sick of these fair weather conservatives that I could puke.
    One of the things about limited government is that you learn to do for yourselves!!! It makes no sense to preach against the government one day, then go running to the statists the moment someone in Mexico gets the sniffles.
    This is retarded. “Conservatives” calling for government intervention, and complaining that Obama isn't giving it to them… Sad.
    I just want to slap them and say “Be happy you schmucks!” Our taxes aren't going up over this (yet), government isn't being grown because of this (yet), we aren't borrowing any money because of this (yet). This is what we wanted two weeks ago! Inactive, low spending government! Don't complain about it!

  53. Anonymous says:

    Maybe this will make those liberals think twice about open borders. I just wonder if they will put it together if Americans start dying, will Obama come out against illegals? Will liberals turn against illegals or will they still try to get their votes?

    This is germ warfare, wake up America!

  54. Anonymous says:

    No because liberals think they are too good to catch the flu.

  55. Anonymous says:

    They better wake up, this is germ warfare, doesn't it sound strange to anyone that this is a mix of 3 different types of flu?

  56. Anonymous says:

    They better wake up, this is germ warfare, doesn't it sound strange to anyone that this is a mix of 3 different types of flu?

    Not at all. No stranger than piling string on a floor, pulling on that string, and watching for the loops and knots to form.

  57. Anonymous says:

    As reported at thehill.com, in part:
    “The “swine flu” that has infected more than 1,000 people in Mexico has led a lawmaker on the House Homeland Security Committee to call on U.S. officials to close the southern border.
    “Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) said the border should be closed until the threat is resolved.
    “The public needs to be aware of the serious threat of swine flu, and we need to close our borders to Mexico immediately and completely until this is resolved,” Massa said in a statement.
    “I am making this announcement because I see this as a serious threat to the health of the American public and I do not believe this issue is receiving the attention it needs to have in the news,” Massa said.”
    Bravo to Rep. Massa for having the courage and intelligence to do what is best for America. Placing American citizens first is the responsibility of all elected officials in this land, and it is about time that those holding office live up to their constitutional responsibility.

  58. Anonymous says:

    by Tom B on Mon 27 Apr 2009 10:31 PM PDT | Permanent Link
    They better wake up, this is germ warfare, doesn't it sound strange to anyone that this is a mix of 3 different types of flu?
    Not at all. No stranger than piling string on a floor, pulling on that string, and watching for the loops and knots to form.

    You don't think that it's strange that this flu is a mix of human, bird and swine flu? The only way the 3 could be mixed in nature is if one of the three species was sick with it's flu and exposed to both of the others species that were sick with their form of the flu at the same time. What are the odds of that? Maybe this is the attack that VP Cheney has been warning us about, but don't expect anyone in the media to connect the dots.

  59. Anonymous says:

    by insidedge on Mon 27 Apr 2009 10:38 PM PDT | Permanent Link
    As reported at thehill.com, in part:
    “The “swine flu” that has infected more than 1,000 people in Mexico has led a lawmaker on the House Homeland Security Committee to call on U.S. officials to close the southern border.
    “Rep. Eric Massa (D-N.Y.) said the border should be closed until the threat is resolved.
    “The public needs to be aware of the serious threat of swine flu, and we need to close our borders to Mexico immediately and completely until this is resolved,” Massa said in a statement.
    “I am making this announcement because I see this as a serious threat to the health of the American public and I do not believe this issue is receiving the attention it needs to have in the news,” Massa said.”
    Bravo to Rep. Massa for having the courage and intelligence to do what is best for America. Placing American citizens first is the responsibility of all elected officials in this land, and it is about time that those holding office live up to their constitutional responsibility.

    Wow, a Dem admitting that they could close the border, so they are admitting that they could stop the illegals at any time.

  60. Anonymous says:
    PARTY SWITCH: Arlen Specter leave Republican Party
    One the GOP's most senior Senators is now a Democrat giving them at least 59 seats.
    Tuesday, April 28, 2009
    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – Pennsylvania Republican Senator Arlen Specter said on Tuesday he will switch parties and run for re-election as a Democrat in 2010, which would increase the number of Senate seats Democrats control to 59.

    Pennsylvania has increasingly voted for Democrats and Specter was facing a tough bid to be the Republican candidate for the Senate seat in the state. If Democrats can control 60 Senate seats, they would be able to bypass Republican procedural hurdles to moving legislation.

    More to come….

    And here comes Franken and a filibuster proof majority. I can just hear the Republicans whining now.

  61. Anonymous says:

    What is wrong with you May? How can you blame this on poor Mexicans? If anything, this is spread by affluent Americans flying to Mexico. Why aren't you talking about the reason that it has gotten so bad in Mexico? The reason is that there is no middle class, just the very very rich and the poor. You know, the very thing that Republicans want for America.

  62. Anonymous says:

    Talk about a conspiriacy theory! When has the FORMER Vice President been right? Cheney is a liar and a fear monger. The more that the right uses him the more that they will fall in the polls.

  63. Anonymous says:

    I don't have a blood lust and I'm not out for revenge, I just want justice. Bush and Cheney have harmed our worldwide reputation so bad that we might never overcome it, unless we clean our own house. There have to be trials, what's wrong with getting down to the nuts and bolts of who is behind all the torture and lies?

  64. Anonymous says:

    That just shows how unpatriotic people like Limbaugh are!

  65. Anonymous says:

    Given his voting record, does it really matter if he has a “D” or an “R” after his name? He's still a Big-Government statist.

  66. Anonymous says:

    this is a win-win for the GOP if u really think about it.

  67. Anonymous says:

    by El cimento on Tue 28 Apr 2009 02:52 PM PDT | Permanent Link
    this is a win-win for the GOP if u really think about it.

    I really thought about it. Who are the two winners in your “win-win”? A filibuster poof Senate isn't a win for anybody.

  68. Anonymous says:

    by Skeptic on Tue 28 Apr 2009 03:02 PM PDT | Permanent Link

    by El cimento on Tue 28 Apr 2009 02:52 PM PDT | Permanent Link
    this is a win-win for the GOP if u really think about it.

    I really thought about it. Who are the two winners in your “win-win”? A filibuster poof Senate isn't a win for anybody.

    ….u have to be in the mind set ive been in since that one moved into the white house. i said…this country absolutely needs to fail both domestically and internationally for the american people to finally once and for all wake up. there is no logic whatsoever that some one with that one's credential should even be allowed to walk on pennsylvania avenue. the american people fell for a feel good moment and it should have to deal with the consequences. i welcome a democratic senate…let them drag the country into a hole…and we all know they will and they wont have anybody to blame but themsleves and then they are out of power again for a few decades. and hopefully america wont get race baited into voting in an empty suit ever again. america wins and the gop wins.

  69. Anonymous says:

    That's the way, the Devil with the country, all that matters is the Party. Gee, that sounds like something that would have come out of that old USSR.

  70. Anonymous says:

    I think that he is saying that it is all about timing and maybe he is right, but I sure hope that the President doesn't sweep this over the door.

  71. Anonymous says:

    by El cimento on Tue 28 Apr 2009 03:08 PM PDT | Permanent Link

    by Skeptic on Tue 28 Apr 2009 03:02 PM PDT | Permanent Link

    by El cimento on Tue 28 Apr 2009 02:52 PM PDT | Permanent Link
    this is a win-win for the GOP if u really think about it.

    I really thought about it. Who are the two winners in your “win-win”? A filibuster poof Senate isn't a win for anybody.

    ….u have to be in the mind set ive been in since that one moved into the white house. i said…this country absolutely needs to fail both domestically and internationally for the american people to finally once and for all wake up. there is no logic whatsoever that some one with that one's credential should even be allowed to walk on pennsylvania avenue. the american people fell for a feel good moment and it should have to deal with the consequences. i welcome a democratic senate…let them drag the country into a hole…and we all know they will and they wont have anybody to blame but themsleves and then they are out of power again for a few decades. and hopefully america wont get race baited into voting in an empty suit ever again. america wins and the gop wins.

    You're hoping he fails…and if by some action, he manages to pull it off DESPITE our resistance..what do you think that will mean for the GOP???

  72. Anonymous says:

    Specter's official switch, whether it takes affect immediately or just for the Senate primary, won't make a lick of difference. We've already seen how he's voted almost lock step with the Obamunists these last 100 days so what if he has that “R” or “D” attached to his name? Personally if I were the Democrats I wouldn't get too excited about getting a loser on their so far winning team. The only reason Specter is switching is because he was heading toward a crushing primary defeat. The ironic thing is that this pice of sh*t only barely won the nomination last time because the Party got behind him, in particularly Rick Santorum. Specter owes everything to the GOP and now he's jumping ship because he thinks it will save his own hide. This isn't like Lieberman in Conneticut who won because the Republicans came out in droves to support him. I wouldn't be surprised if Specter doesn't even get the Dem nomination.

  73. Anonymous says:

    by Tsalagi on Tue 28 Apr 2009 03:22 PM PDT | Permanent Link
    You're hoping he fails…and if by some action, he manages to pull it off DESPITE our resistance..what do you think that will mean for the GOP???

    I think people are not clearly thinking about Obama “pulling it off”. I recently listened to a discussion about Obama succeeding. Here is the way it went:
    Several Western states have water conservation problems. Everyone preaches “water conservation”. However, if you house catches fire, it's foolish to hold water conservation as the number one principle to live by until the fire is out.
    IMO, the majority of the citizens see the spending of the Democrats as putting out the “fire” of recession or depression and see our GOP as sitting on the sidelines yelling about “water conservation”. If this is the case, then Obama can succeed by just putting out the “fire”.
    If, in addition, a new economy develops on new green technology, a reduction in spending and increase prosperity may indeed give citizens the opinion that Obama “pulled it off”. I fear the GOP is in a very bad position and need very careful and creative leadership.

  74. Anonymous says:

    I don't want to sound like a crazy, but ask yourself why now? We know that all the Lib talk against wiretapping sure disappeared when they got into power and why hasn't Obama ended that awful spying on Americans? I wouldn't be surprised if this President isn't Blackmailing people like Specter. I think it's time to talk about Dem corruption.

  75. Anonymous says:

    Because it's politically viable for him. Personally, I think it's about time.
    It's better to see who is really who in these parties, wouldn't you agree?
    The Republican party isn't any better or worse off with/without Specter. The state voters are probably outraged if they voted for him being a Republican… but somehow I doubt that.
    It's simply another opportunity for Republicans to excel.
    He said it himself in an MSNBC article I read earlier: “I am unwilling to have my 29-year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate.”
    It's political self-preservation time for Specter… Now it's time for the commonwealth state to groom a viable Republican candidate who can bridge not just parties, but generations of differences in how this country should be managed.

  76. Anonymous says:

    You mean if by some miracle the dems are able to tax, spend & borrow the USA into prosperity?
    Then the GOP is in trouble. However, their model has never succeeded.
    I'm not pulling against America, but I have low expectations that a tried & failed method will all of the sudden work…

  77. Anonymous says:

    by Skeptic on Tue 28 Apr 2009 03:48 PM PDT | Permanent Link

    by Tsalagi on Tue 28 Apr 2009 03:22 PM PDT | Permanent Link
    You're hoping he fails…and if by some action, he manages to pull it off DESPITE our resistance..what do you think that will mean for the GOP???

    I think people are not clearly thinking about Obama “pulling it off”. I recently listened to a discussion about Obama succeeding. Here is the way it went:
    Several Western states have water conservation problems. Everyone preaches “water conservation”. However, if you house catches fire, it's foolish to hold water conservation as the number one principle to live by until the fire is out.
    IMO, the majority of the citizens see the spending of the Democrats as putting out the “fire” of recession or depression and see our GOP as sitting on the sidelines yelling about “water conservation”. If this is the case, then Obama can succeed by just putting out the “fire”.
    If, in addition, a new economy develops on new green technology, a reduction in spending and increase prosperity may indeed give citizens the opinion that Obama “pulled it off”. I fear the GOP is in a very bad position and need very careful and creative leadership.

    If we were out in the woods around a campfire after dark – I'd be freaking scared right now.  But we're not.  If you can point to one example where the current strategy of spend more of what you don't have will lead to properity, regardless of the engine, I might be inclined to shiver a bit.

    Now the damage certain to be wrought before folks smarten up in a couple years is truly unnerving.  But smarten up they will.

    We survived Carter and made a comeback.  Then Clinton. Back to FDR.  Rinse. Repeat.

    Of course I could just be whistling in the woods to keep my spirits up.

    But you are correct that we are in a bad way and need careful and creative leadership, devoid of narrow minded small picture social conservatives and fiscal liberals.  Now how to make that happen…?

  78. Anonymous says:

    You guys should school up a little more, you accuse the President of being a socialist and a fascist, but the two are opposites. If anyone in American politics would fit the title of fascist it would be the Neocons. There has been nothing that President Obama has done that would classify him as either.

  79. Anonymous says:

    By the sound of it the right isn't very happy about losing their filibuster. Now they will have to put America first.

  80. Anonymous says:

    Senate Passes $3.5 Trillion Budget Plan
    Following House vote, Senate approves $3.5 trillion budget outline that lays the groundwork for President Obama's ambitious initiatives on health care and education. The major legislative victory for Obama comes on the president's 100th day in office.
    For more information, visit washingtonpost.com

Leave a Comment