test
Cantor: All Progress In Talks Erased
jojobean
Veteran
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Age:38
Posts: 3,341
Location: In Georgia sipping a virgin pina' colada while the rest of the world is drunk
14 Jul 2011, 11:39 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
jojobean wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
jojobean wrote:
If SS dont come in...I will have to live on limited savings until they get their asses together. I wonder how many elderly have to be evicted from rental homes and be homeless if they dont have family to take them for those on the hill to get their crap togther. I dont see how they can legally deny ppl their Social security they they paid into all their working lives...isnt that a ponzi scheme??? Maybe this is how they are going to solve the social security crunch??? deny them their money and let them waste away.
I think that's been the Republican plan all along.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Social Security is going to collapse anyway. May as well address the problem now instead of foisting it on our grandchildren.
ruveyn
The same deficit hawks that want to do away with SS...are the same ones proposing major increases in the defense budget. The money is there, but they want to wage an endless war on the backs of the most vunerable in our society. This is not about the deficit as much as it is about shifting money around for their political agenda for war. If they end the major tax breaks for the rich and even it out more, pull back on forgien aid and end the wars...there will be plenty of money for Social security. Our defense budget is unsustainable as it is, but they wanting major increases of it because a wartime president has powers that a peacetime president does not in making changes to the system.
Where did you get that lunatic rant from mediamatters or the Puffington Post?
Obama hasn't been willing to negotiate on anything, he just wants lots of tax hikes which is insane in a recession. All this crud bashing spending on National Defense is further idiotic because it is stated in the pre-amble of the Constitution that National Defense is one of the responsibilities of Government for goodness sakes.
I'm for ending the wars if it is done responsibly, but the problem is a lot of people want to end them ad hoc in the most irresponsible way possible and give Al Qaeda bases to attack us all over again.
The troop surge in Iraq worked and that country is looking to be a success story, meanwhile Afghanistan is turning into a lost cause the way politicians have screwed up everything.
Furthermore, why are we in Libya?
Dont worry, I dont cut Obama any slack either...I think the whole lot of them repubs and dems are self serving a-holes and if they cant agree on a budget come aug 2nd, then all their pensions should be not paid as well. In a real world enviroment, if a group of employees acted like that, quite a few would be fired. If they are not willing to do their jobs then they need to suffer the consiquences like everyone else.
As far as my souce, I have read from several different sources like cnn, rawstory, motherjones that miltary budget expansion is being pushed in the house. Who owns the house right now?. Republicans. I am just stating what bills have been presented and pointing out the obvious. Personally, I believe that republicans and democrats are really one party for the most part that fights like WWF in public and then behind closed doors, go have coffee with the corperates who own them.
_________________
All art is a kind of confession, more or less oblique. All artists, if they are to survive, are forced, at last, to tell the whole story; to vomit the anguish up.
-James Baldwin
15 Jul 2011, 1:02 am
Congress will NEVER allow defaulting on our debt obligations. The republicans simply see an opportunity to make Obama look stupid for a while so they're going to run with it. But there's absolutely no way at all they'd ever allow us to default. It would destroy the economy overnight and that mutually assured destruction is what will ensure there's a "last minute" deal to save us.
15 Jul 2011, 2:00 am
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
If you believe that not a single American military boot has stepped on Libyan soil, I think I have a bridge to sell you. Furthermore, there wasn't air power when the Constitution was written, so it is arguable that in fact Obama is still out of bounds because our aircraft have been in Libyan Airspace.
I'll admit we probably have CIA and military intelligence agents on the ground as advisers and trainers. But it should be remembered that Reagan had done the same thing in El Salvador, arguably constituting a "secret war," but which he had never faced any repercussions for in his day. Quite simply, this is not war per say.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
There's a big difference between sending spooks and instructors to El Salvador and sending warplanes and carrier-based marine expeditionary forces to Lybia. Just because we aren't using land bases does not mean there are no marines fighting there. Unless the 26th marine expeditionary force, later relieved by the 22nd marine expeditionary force (2,200 men each) doesn't constitute "boots on the ground" to you.
_________________
"Gun control is like trying to reduce drunk driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars."
- Unknown
"A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
-Sigmund Freud
15 Jul 2011, 2:14 am
John_Browning wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
If you believe that not a single American military boot has stepped on Libyan soil, I think I have a bridge to sell you. Furthermore, there wasn't air power when the Constitution was written, so it is arguable that in fact Obama is still out of bounds because our aircraft have been in Libyan Airspace.
I'll admit we probably have CIA and military intelligence agents on the ground as advisers and trainers. But it should be remembered that Reagan had done the same thing in El Salvador, arguably constituting a "secret war," but which he had never faced any repercussions for in his day. Quite simply, this is not war per say.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
There's a big difference between sending spooks and instructors to El Salvador and sending warplanes and carrier-based marine expeditionary forces to Lybia. Just because we aren't using land bases does not mean there are no marines fighting there. Unless the 26th marine expeditionary force, later relieved by the 22nd marine expeditionary force (2,200 men each) doesn't constitute "boots on the ground" to you.
I admit I'm not up on all the details of our Libyan excursion as I should be. So far, I haven't heard of any American deaths, or of American soldiers killing any Libyans. Until active combat is reported, I don't see this as war just yet. And as I recall, Bill Clinton was able to halt Serbian aggression in the Balkans with air bombings. Even though I obviously lived through that, I can't recall if he had the congressional go ahead or not. And being that I have to be up early tomorrow, I'm not going to look it up.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
jojobean
Veteran
Joined: 12 Aug 2009
Age:38
Posts: 3,341
Location: In Georgia sipping a virgin pina' colada while the rest of the world is drunk
15 Jul 2011, 3:18 pm
no offense, but military force is military force, boots on the ground or not...trying to seperate the two is like splitting hairs. I know you like Obama and all, but he dirrectly broke his campain promice when he said that he will strive to talk things over and not jump to war. He is a bit of a war mongerer. I dont think the US has been in this many wars at once since WWII.
just because there are no US casulties dosnt mean there are no libyan casulties. Military weapons are being used against those in libya...therfore it is war...if it is not war, then is it international homicide?
_________________
All art is a kind of confession, more or less oblique. All artists, if they are to survive, are forced, at last, to tell the whole story; to vomit the anguish up.
-James Baldwin
15 Jul 2011, 3:29 pm
jojobean wrote:
no offense, but military force is military force, boots on the ground or not...trying to seperate the two is like splitting hairs. I know you like Obama and all, but he dirrectly broke his campain promice when he said that he will strive to talk things over and not jump to war. He is a bit of a war mongerer. I dont think the US has been in this many wars at once since WWII.
just because there are no US casulties dosnt mean there are no libyan casulties. Military weapons are being used against those in libya...therfore it is war...if it is not war, then is it international homicide?
just because there are no US casulties dosnt mean there are no libyan casulties. Military weapons are being used against those in libya...therfore it is war...if it is not war, then is it international homicide?
Well then let's just say we're perched on the precipice of war.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
15 Jul 2011, 10:44 pm
The forces in Libya are on loan to NATO. The US has no involvment. It is just like NATO loans a few troops so our invasion of Afganistan becomes located somewhere in the North Atlantic. The News Reporters have fallen for this, as they report from mid Atlantic. That is why all news of Afganistan comes down to an occasional whale sighting.
Meanwhile Congress has declared they never knew anything about spending money, debts, and are in fact a tax free social club. They also claim it is impossible that 545 people could possibly spend $14.3 Trillion dollars. They would each have to spend two billion a year for ten years.
When informed that they did, and $30 Trillion in government income, over the last ten years, 30% of the Gross National Product, bringing the total to six billion a year each, Congress said that showed the need for Tax Cuts for job producers.
In emergency session Congress voted to double their pay, and take a ten year advance.
As the Leaders of The Free World, citing One Nation Under God, Homeland Security has been charged to round up all Heratics, unemployed internet users, and transport them to Special Facilities, for trial by Faith Based Organizations. Mandatory torture has been ordered. Those found guilty of lack of faith in God's Government will be burned at the stake, Live on Fox.
16 Jul 2011, 4:09 am
johnsmcjohn wrote:
Congress will NEVER allow defaulting on our debt obligations. The republicans simply see an opportunity to make Obama look stupid for a while so they're going to run with it. But there's absolutely no way at all they'd ever allow us to default. It would destroy the economy overnight and that mutually assured destruction is what will ensure there's a "last minute" deal to save us.
I would not bet on that. I think this has gone beyond a mere political contest (or game of chicken, if you will). I think this struggle has assumed a religious or philosophical aspect. But, we shall see. August is coming.
ruveyn
16 Jul 2011, 3:34 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
If you believe that not a single American military boot has stepped on Libyan soil, I think I have a bridge to sell you. Furthermore, there wasn't air power when the Constitution was written, so it is arguable that in fact Obama is still out of bounds because our aircraft have been in Libyan Airspace.
I'll admit we probably have CIA and military intelligence agents on the ground as advisers and trainers. But it should be remembered that Reagan had done the same thing in El Salvador, arguably constituting a "secret war," but which he had never faced any repercussions for in his day. Quite simply, this is not war per say.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
There's a big difference between sending spooks and instructors to El Salvador and sending warplanes and carrier-based marine expeditionary forces to Lybia. Just because we aren't using land bases does not mean there are no marines fighting there. Unless the 26th marine expeditionary force, later relieved by the 22nd marine expeditionary force (2,200 men each) doesn't constitute "boots on the ground" to you.
I admit I'm not up on all the details of our Libyan excursion as I should be. So far, I haven't heard of any American deaths, or of American soldiers killing any Libyans. Until active combat is reported, I don't see this as war just yet. And as I recall, Bill Clinton was able to halt Serbian aggression in the Balkans with air bombings. Even though I obviously lived through that, I can't recall if he had the congressional go ahead or not. And being that I have to be up early tomorrow, I'm not going to look it up.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I think Clinton went to Congress within the allotted time period and got Congressional Approval over Bosnia, so don't drag him into this.
16 Jul 2011, 11:26 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
If you believe that not a single American military boot has stepped on Libyan soil, I think I have a bridge to sell you. Furthermore, there wasn't air power when the Constitution was written, so it is arguable that in fact Obama is still out of bounds because our aircraft have been in Libyan Airspace.
I'll admit we probably have CIA and military intelligence agents on the ground as advisers and trainers. But it should be remembered that Reagan had done the same thing in El Salvador, arguably constituting a "secret war," but which he had never faced any repercussions for in his day. Quite simply, this is not war per say.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
There's a big difference between sending spooks and instructors to El Salvador and sending warplanes and carrier-based marine expeditionary forces to Lybia. Just because we aren't using land bases does not mean there are no marines fighting there. Unless the 26th marine expeditionary force, later relieved by the 22nd marine expeditionary force (2,200 men each) doesn't constitute "boots on the ground" to you.
I admit I'm not up on all the details of our Libyan excursion as I should be. So far, I haven't heard of any American deaths, or of American soldiers killing any Libyans. Until active combat is reported, I don't see this as war just yet. And as I recall, Bill Clinton was able to halt Serbian aggression in the Balkans with air bombings. Even though I obviously lived through that, I can't recall if he had the congressional go ahead or not. And being that I have to be up early tomorrow, I'm not going to look it up.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I think Clinton went to Congress within the allotted time period and got Congressional Approval over Bosnia, so don't drag him into this.
I haven't cared to look it up yet, so till then it's an open question for me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
17 Jul 2011, 8:50 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
If you believe that not a single American military boot has stepped on Libyan soil, I think I have a bridge to sell you. Furthermore, there wasn't air power when the Constitution was written, so it is arguable that in fact Obama is still out of bounds because our aircraft have been in Libyan Airspace.
I'll admit we probably have CIA and military intelligence agents on the ground as advisers and trainers. But it should be remembered that Reagan had done the same thing in El Salvador, arguably constituting a "secret war," but which he had never faced any repercussions for in his day. Quite simply, this is not war per say.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
There's a big difference between sending spooks and instructors to El Salvador and sending warplanes and carrier-based marine expeditionary forces to Lybia. Just because we aren't using land bases does not mean there are no marines fighting there. Unless the 26th marine expeditionary force, later relieved by the 22nd marine expeditionary force (2,200 men each) doesn't constitute "boots on the ground" to you.
I admit I'm not up on all the details of our Libyan excursion as I should be. So far, I haven't heard of any American deaths, or of American soldiers killing any Libyans. Until active combat is reported, I don't see this as war just yet. And as I recall, Bill Clinton was able to halt Serbian aggression in the Balkans with air bombings. Even though I obviously lived through that, I can't recall if he had the congressional go ahead or not. And being that I have to be up early tomorrow, I'm not going to look it up.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I think Clinton went to Congress within the allotted time period and got Congressional Approval over Bosnia, so don't drag him into this.
I haven't cared to look it up yet, so till then it's an open question for me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
http://articles.latimes.com/1993-09-09/ ... ng-mission
Looks like he nearly pulled an Obama, but ultimately did seek Congressional Approval.
17 Jul 2011, 10:18 pm
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
If you believe that not a single American military boot has stepped on Libyan soil, I think I have a bridge to sell you. Furthermore, there wasn't air power when the Constitution was written, so it is arguable that in fact Obama is still out of bounds because our aircraft have been in Libyan Airspace.
I'll admit we probably have CIA and military intelligence agents on the ground as advisers and trainers. But it should be remembered that Reagan had done the same thing in El Salvador, arguably constituting a "secret war," but which he had never faced any repercussions for in his day. Quite simply, this is not war per say.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
There's a big difference between sending spooks and instructors to El Salvador and sending warplanes and carrier-based marine expeditionary forces to Lybia. Just because we aren't using land bases does not mean there are no marines fighting there. Unless the 26th marine expeditionary force, later relieved by the 22nd marine expeditionary force (2,200 men each) doesn't constitute "boots on the ground" to you.
I admit I'm not up on all the details of our Libyan excursion as I should be. So far, I haven't heard of any American deaths, or of American soldiers killing any Libyans. Until active combat is reported, I don't see this as war just yet. And as I recall, Bill Clinton was able to halt Serbian aggression in the Balkans with air bombings. Even though I obviously lived through that, I can't recall if he had the congressional go ahead or not. And being that I have to be up early tomorrow, I'm not going to look it up.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I think Clinton went to Congress within the allotted time period and got Congressional Approval over Bosnia, so don't drag him into this.
I haven't cared to look it up yet, so till then it's an open question for me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
http://articles.latimes.com/1993-09-09/ ... ng-mission
Looks like he nearly pulled an Obama, but ultimately did seek Congressional Approval.
So y'see, better late than never!
-Bill, otherwise known a Kraichgauer
17 Jul 2011, 11:06 pm
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
John_Browning wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
If you believe that not a single American military boot has stepped on Libyan soil, I think I have a bridge to sell you. Furthermore, there wasn't air power when the Constitution was written, so it is arguable that in fact Obama is still out of bounds because our aircraft have been in Libyan Airspace.
I'll admit we probably have CIA and military intelligence agents on the ground as advisers and trainers. But it should be remembered that Reagan had done the same thing in El Salvador, arguably constituting a "secret war," but which he had never faced any repercussions for in his day. Quite simply, this is not war per say.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
There's a big difference between sending spooks and instructors to El Salvador and sending warplanes and carrier-based marine expeditionary forces to Lybia. Just because we aren't using land bases does not mean there are no marines fighting there. Unless the 26th marine expeditionary force, later relieved by the 22nd marine expeditionary force (2,200 men each) doesn't constitute "boots on the ground" to you.
I admit I'm not up on all the details of our Libyan excursion as I should be. So far, I haven't heard of any American deaths, or of American soldiers killing any Libyans. Until active combat is reported, I don't see this as war just yet. And as I recall, Bill Clinton was able to halt Serbian aggression in the Balkans with air bombings. Even though I obviously lived through that, I can't recall if he had the congressional go ahead or not. And being that I have to be up early tomorrow, I'm not going to look it up.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
I think Clinton went to Congress within the allotted time period and got Congressional Approval over Bosnia, so don't drag him into this.
I haven't cared to look it up yet, so till then it's an open question for me.
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
http://articles.latimes.com/1993-09-09/ ... ng-mission
Looks like he nearly pulled an Obama, but ultimately did seek Congressional Approval.
So y'see, better late than never!
-Bill, otherwise known a Kraichgauer
Clinton still got Congressional Approval within the allotted time period, Obama made it clear he could care less, and he supposedly taught Constitutional law.
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| Cantor fluke |
20 Jun 2014, 1:31 pm |
| Eric Cantor ousted |
11 Jun 2014, 3:38 pm |
| Eric Cantor heading to Wall St |
05 Sep 2014, 9:39 pm |
| We Don't Have Erik Cantor To Kick Around Anymore! |
18 Jun 2014, 10:40 am |
