Why doesn't Obama get called out on nation building and violating civil liberties?

Liberals and Democrats tore into Bush 24/7 for doing it yet Obama gets a free pass. Liberals and Democrats bitched about Gitmo, The Patriot Act, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, drones, illegal wiretaps, etc... when Bush did it but they're silent when Obama does it. I just honestly laugh at these Obama supporters and lovers that are so delusional and ignorant on this shit. They're 100 percent supportive of The Patriot Act, the NDAA, nation building in the Middle East, drone attacks, and pretty much anything that Bush did fighting the so-called war on terror when their guy Obama does it. Fuckin' sheep.

Obama isn't a liberal when it comes to foreign policy and the war on terror. He is a warmongering neo-con just like Bush. And you've got his supporters being 100 percent supportive of going into Syria and doing some nation building.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob1983

And you've got his supporters being 100 percent supportive of going into Syria and doing some nation building.

---

They might want to rethink this.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/fa626...#axzz24E4V6Nr5

Quote:

---

BEIRUT – Russia warned the west on Tuesday against unilateral action on Syria, a day after US President Barack Obama threatened “enormous consequences” if his Syrian counterpart used chemical or biological arms or even moved them in a menacing way.
Sergei Lavrov, Russian foreign minister, speaking after meeting China’s top diplomat, said Moscow and Beijing were committed to “the need to strictly adhere to the norms of international law . . . and not to allow their violation”.

Qadri Jamil, Syrian deputy prime minister, also speaking in Moscow, dismissed Mr Obama’s threat as media fodder. “Direct military intervention in Syria is impossible because whoever thinks about it . . . is heading towards a confrontation wider than Syria’s borders,” he told a news conference.
Mr Jamil said the west was seeking an excuse to intervene, likening the focus on Syria’s chemical weapons to the run-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq on what proved to be groundless suspicions that Saddam Hussein was concealing weapons of mass destruction.
He also appeared to suggest that Mr Assad’s departure could be discussed if talks between the government, the rebels and the international community ever took place, but ruled out the president’s resignation as a precondition. “After the dialogue begins, there’s nothing that should prevent the discussion of any issue – and that [Mr Assad’s position] is a question that can be discussed as well,” he said.
Russia and China have opposed military intervention in Syria throughout a 17-month-old revolt against President Bashar al-Assad. They have vetoed three UN Security Council resolutions backed by western and Arab states that would have put more pressure on Damascus to end violence that has cost 18,000 lives.
In one of the latest battle zones, Syrian troops and tanks overran the Damascus suburbs of Mouadamiya on Tuesday, killing at least 20 young men and burning shops and houses before pulling back, residents and opposition activists said.
The bodies of the men, mostly shot at point-blank range, were found in basements and looted premises, bringing to 50 the death toll from the army’s two-day offensive to drive rebels from the Sunni Muslim suburb in the south-west of the capital.
“People are just starting to get out of their homes to see the destruction,” said one activist who gave her name as Hayat.
Opposition sources said Free Syrian Army rebels left Mouadamiya at dawn under heavy aerial and ground bombardment.
State-imposed curbs on media made it impossible to verify the reports of the violence, which followed another bloody day on Monday, when about 200 people were killed across the country, according to the opposition Syrian Observatory for Human Rights.
On Tuesday the Higher Leadership Council for the Syrian Revolution, an opposition group, claimed that Syria’s air force had redeployed 30 Sukhoi fighter-bomber Su-22 jets closer to cities where the army is battling to crush rebels in the north and east of the country.
“This type of Sukhoi is more geared to bombing missions than aerial combat. They are now within a more manageable range to hit the cities of Aleppo, Homs and Deir al-Zor and areas in Idlib province,” a spokesman for the group told Reuters from Amman.
Mr Obama used some of his strongest language yet on Monday to warn Mr Assad not to use unconventional weapons.
“We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is [if] we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilised,” he said. “That would change my calculus.”
Syria last month acknowledged for the first time that it had chemical or biological weapons and said it could use them if foreign countries attacked it.
The US-based Global Security website says there are four suspected chemical weapons sites in Syria producing the nerve agents VX, sarin and tabun. It does not cite its sources.
Israel, still formally at war with Syria, has also debated whether to attack the unconventional arms sites, which it views as its gravest peril from the conflict next door.
● TRIPOLI – Four people were killed and more than 60 wounded in clashes between Sunni Muslims and Alawites in Lebanon’s northern city of Tripoli as the war in neighbouring Syria inflamed tensions there again, security and medical sources said on Tuesday.
Gunmen in the Sunni district of Bab al-Tabbaneh and their Alawite rivals in Jebel Mohsen exchanged gun and grenade fire in sporadic fighting overnight and into the day, despite action by Lebanese troops deployed in the port city, residents said.
The area is one of Lebanon’s most volatile sectarian fault lines and tensions in Tripoli have been heightened by the uprising in Syria. Clashes in the city killed 15 people in early June.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob1983

Liberals and Democrats tore into Bush 24/7 for doing it yet Obama gets a free pass. Liberals and Democrats bitched about Gitmo, The Patriot Act, the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, drones, illegal wiretaps, etc... when Bush did it but they're silent when Obama does it. I just honestly laugh at these Obama supporters and lovers that are so delusional and ignorant on this shit. They're 100 percent supportive of The Patriot Act, the NDAA, nation building in the Middle East, drone attacks, and pretty much anything that Bush did fighting the so-called war on terror when their guy Obama does it. Fuckin' sheep.

Obama isn't a liberal when it comes to foreign policy and the war on terror. He is a warmongering neo-con just like Bush. And you've got his supporters being 100 percent supportive of going into Syria and doing some nation building.

---

Don't call him a neocon. He's a typical liberal like Johnson was, who took us to war with Viet-Nam, and grew the social welfare state.

It's the reason Barry isn't getting my vote.

more reasons why this is a bad idea

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/russia-chin...064452353.html

Quote:

---

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned the West on Tuesday against any unilateral action on Syria after President Barack Obama said U.S. forces could act if the Syrian leader deployed chemical weapons against rebels trying to topple him.
Russia and China have opposed military intervention in Syria throughout 17 months of bloodshed and have vetoed three U.N. Security Council resolutions backed by Western and Arab states that would have raised pressure on Damascus to end violence.
Lavrov spoke at a meeting with China's top diplomat one day after Obama, in some of his strongest language yet, said U.S. forces could move against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad if he resorted to chemical weapons against insurgents.
Russia and China base their diplomatic cooperation on "the need to strictly adhere to the norms of international law and the principles contained in the U.N. Charter, and not to allow their violation", Lavrov said at a meeting with Chinese State Councillor Dai Bingguo.
"I think this is the only correct path in today's conditions," Lavrov told Dai, who also met President Vladimir Putin and his top security adviser, Nikolai Patrushev, on Monday for consultations went unannounced by the Kremlin.
Lavrov's remarks underscored Moscow's wish to keep international efforts to end Syria's crisis within the United Nations, where Russia and China wield clout as two of the five permanent Security Council members with veto power.
Frustrated by the vetoes and by the refusal of Russia and China to join calls for Assad to leave power, the United States and other Western and Arab countries are seeking other ways to exert influence on the situation in Syria.
NO LIBYA REPEAT
Obama said on Monday he had refrained "at this point" from ordering military engagement in Syria. But when asked whether he might deploy forces, for example to secure Syrian chemical and biological weapons, he said his view could change.
Russia has also expressed concern about Syria chemical weapons, saying it had told Damascus that even the threat to use them was unacceptable.
But Lavrov said on Monday that the Security Council alone could authorize the use of external force against Syria, warning against imposing "democracy by bombs".
Russian leaders have said they are determined to avoid a repeat of what occurred in 2011 in Libya, when Moscow let NATO military operations go ahead by abstaining from Security Council resolution that authorized air operations.
Russian officials then accused the United States and its allies of overstepping their mandate and using it to help rebels overthrow longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi. Putin, prime minister then but now back in official charge of foreign policy, likened the U.N. resolution to "medieval calls for crusades".
Russia denies that it is propping up Assad and says it would accept his exit in a political transition decided by the Syrian people, but that his departure must not be a precondition and he must not be pushed out by external forces.
Putin, who has faced frequent U.S. and European criticism over his treatment of dissent, has made opposition to foreign intervention in sovereign states on human rights grounds a central plank of his foreign policy in his new presidency.
China has issued similar warnings to the West.
In remarks at the start of his otherwise private meeting with Dai and other officials, Lavrov said the opportunity to discuss coordination on global affairs was "very, very timely".
Dai, speaking through an interpreter, said he was in Russia for "consultations on strategic security" and had had a "very good, friendly and important meeting" with Putin.
A Syrian delegation led by Qadri Jamil, deputy prime minister for economic affairs, was also in Moscow on Tuesday and was expected to meet Foreign Ministry officials. It was Jamil's second visit this month.

---

He is a neo-con when it comes to foreign policy and war. He is a nation building war monger. Wake the fuck up.

Liberals have been all over his ass on the NDAA and civil liberties issues. As for nation building, the only reason Dubya caught flak for that is because he specifically said he was against it while campaigning in 2000. As for Obama, he has us mostly out of Iraq, he has a pullout plan in place for Afghanistan, and he did not commit us to nation building in Libya after bombing the place.

Obama has done a lot of shit liberals haven't liked (no public option in Republican based health care reform, weak Wall Street reform, extension of Bush tax cuts, etc.) and there has been plenty of complaining. If you think that means liberals are going to turn around and vote for Mitt Romney, then you are crazy.

Other than Glenn Greenwald, name a liberal that has bashed Obama on the NDAA, the Patriot Act, and civil liberties. Has George Clooney, Ben Affleck, Jared Leto, Mark Ruffalo, Sean Penn, Joy Behar, Angelina Jolie, Tom Hanks, Olivia Wilde, Will Smith, etc... said anything about it?
Matt Damon has bashed Obama but he did not mention the civil liberties crap. He basically said Obama didn't bring any hope and change to the table.

Of course, liberals and Democrats won't vote for Romney because Obama is their guy.
I do find it hilarious and amusing that liberals haven't attacked Romney on foreign policy and nation building because they know they would be hypocrites since Romney and Obama are basically the same on foreign policy, war, and the military.


What about Syria? You ready for some nation building over there? America should provide the sick, wounded, and displaced with aid but no nation building please. I don't have a problem with America helping people, but going into another country and saying "you're gonna do it this way or we're gonna force you to do it this way" is not okay in my opinion.

Obama didn't get U.S. troops out of Iraq. I laugh and smile when people make that claim. Iraq got the U.S. troops out of Iraq because they basically told America to get the fuck out and said that they would stop giving immunity to U.S. forces in Iraq. Thank you. Besides, this agreement was made when evil Bush was president.

liberals are hypocrites, they will defend "their guy" no matter what because of some misplaced party loyalty. the divide in this country is just too huge to ever be bridged.

Who the hell defends Obama anymore? The guy's a piece of shit and it's a disgrace that the choice is between him and Romney in what looks like the worst presidential election since Bush/Gore in 2000. Shit, this one looks even worse when you factor in the Ryan plan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

It's the reason Barry isn't getting my vote.

---

Dude, your election was last month; lo siento you were on siesta, but Enrique Peña Nieto already won. When are you guys going to elect someone to end the Maseca subsidies and return them back to maíz so I can get some decent nixtamal damnit?

:cry greatest pres in history :cry

To be fair, both neo-cons and liberals defend their leaders with an iron fist and blind obedience. I think Obama sucks but I don't want him to suck. I don't want things to be shitty in America. I'm not one of these hateful neo-cons that wants Obama to suck ass just because they hate him or because he's half black or a so-called liberal.
Things might be shitty in America but you could live in Somalia, the Gaza Strip, or North Korea. Have to count your blessings.

I know that Democrats and Republicans hate hearing this but America needs and deserves a legitimate 3rd party.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by baseline bum

Who the hell defends Obama anymore? The guy's a piece of shit and it's a disgrace that the choice is between him and Romney in what looks like the worst presidential election since Bush/Gore in 2000. Shit, this one looks even worse when you factor in the Ryan plan.

---

either way ur force to vote for one of them, and u know what ur gettin from either one anyway

if you clowns can accept bush 2 terms, then might as well accept obama for 2nd term.....if it aint broken, dont fix it...even if the pace of nation rebuilding is slow...compared to voting in some unknown guy...the damage has been done.

you've apparently not read many of my posts here. or El Nono's. or LnGrrRs. there's a solid contingent of ST posters who've been giving Obama the business on precisely these two things for awhile.

(you can check. advanced search function is your friend)

What nation has Obama decided to build that the US wasn't already committed to by dubya and dickhead? Nobody can stop wars (Obama got trashed by the Repugs for keeping dubya's Iraq pullout agreemet) or stop those investments. They take on a logic and momentum of their own.

That's why I said years ago the shit dubya/dickhead/neocons started would cost the USA for decades.

Then throw in the conservative/libertarian deregulation of finance and tax cutting, you've got impoverishment of the 99% with ridiculous inequality and empowerment of the 1% and the UCA that will require a civil war to reverse.

In dubya's famously silly logic, "our military men have to keep wasting their lives to honor the military men who already wasted their lives (for oil)"

If you right-wingers think Gecko and Repugs will stop the neo-con, God-wants-USA-to-own-the-planet foreign policy of dubya/dickhead/neo-cons, or stop the Petraeus' planet-wide murdering and secret invasions, then look at the neo-cons working in Gecko's campaign, who want to go into Iran (for oil).

and that's what you do: give Obama a free ride for everything bad he does. absurdly, you blame the party not in power.

Obama versus Romney......I'd rather just sit this one out.


Having said that, Obama versus Romney is almost a perfect metaphor for our fucked up, blue versue red political system....you know, the system that guys like boutons are in love with.

@Jacob1983: for an example of a progressive lib who criticizes Obama harshly on nation building and civil liberties, you should check out Glenn Greenwald's articles on Slate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

and that's what you do: give Obama a free ride for everything bad he does. absurdly, you blame the party not in power.

---

bull fucking shit. I don't give Obama a free ride.

It'sthat shit started decades ago (financial deregulation leading to the Banksters' Great Depression, one of many, inevitable 1%-enricher events to come) and under dubya/dickhead unstoppable, and very probably irreversible (wars, civil liberties violations, unlimited surveillance by UCA and govt of civilians) are stoppable by Presidential edict.

And Gecko/Ryan/Repugs won't stop any of it. They will certainly make it all much worse, as they have plainly, repeatedly announced, including going after Iran's oil (which of course they don't mention now).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsmith

the system that guys like boutons are in love with.

---

You Fucking Lie, stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

And Gecko/Ryan/Repugs won't stop any of it.

---

neither will Obama, who surely has made it worse

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

stalker

---

????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mavs>spurs

liberals are hypocrites, they will defend "their guy" no matter what because of some misplaced party loyalty. the divide in this country is just too huge to ever be bridged.

---

There's idiots like that in both parties, even though their establishments do the same shit when in power.... the two-party paradigm is a joke, tbh.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clipper Nation

There's idiots like that in both parties, even though their establishments do the same shit when in power.... the two-party paradigm is a joke, tbh.....

---

I've often said that the very people that constantly post in the political forum are a wonderful example of this. Look at Boutons/GGA/etc versus Yoni/Wild Cobra/etc....they fucking love the red versus blue, wouldn't have it any other way imo.


They're the reason this country is going to shit.....well, not them exactly, since posting on this site does nothing (repeat nbaDan, nothing) to contribute to society....but the thought process they have anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wild Cobra

Don't call him a neocon. He's a typical liberal like Johnson was, who took us to war with Viet-Nam, and grew the social welfare state.

---

WTF do you think the word Neocon means, anyway?

HAWK SPENDER

neocons are essentially Cold War liberals, rewarmed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsmith

they fucking love the red versus blue, wouldn't have it any other way imo.

---

You Lie

I don't love the blue, but I really, really, really HATE THE RED and how they have fucked up the country.

I don't care which party runs the country FOR THE PEOPLE, but both parties run the country for the 1% and UCA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons_deux

You Lie

I don't love the blue, but I really, really, really HATE THE RED and how they have fucked up the country.

I don't care which party runs the country FOR THE PEOPLE, but both parties run the country for the 1% and UCA.

---

Fair enough.

And see, that was an actual answer, and a good one at that. If you'd just remove the overly dramatic, political, "you lie" type of bullshit that you insist on adding, you'd be taken more serious from all the people in here you are trying to "win over".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob1983

Other than Glenn Greenwald, name a liberal that has bashed Obama on the NDAA, the Patriot Act, and civil liberties. Has George Clooney, Ben Affleck, Jared Leto, Mark Ruffalo, Sean Penn, Joy Behar, Angelina Jolie, Tom Hanks, Olivia Wilde, Will Smith, etc... said anything about it?
Matt Damon has bashed Obama but he did not mention the civil liberties crap. He basically said Obama didn't bring any hope and change to the table.

---

LOL celebrities. Maybe you should get your political commentary from somewhere other than US Weekly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

and that's what you do: give Obama a free ride for everything bad he does. absurdly, you blame the party not in power.

---

Firemen inherit messes too. They generally don't pour gasoline on them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsmith

Fair enough.

And see, that was an actual answer, and a good one at that. If you'd just remove the overly dramatic, political, "you lie" type of bullshit that you insist on adding, you'd be taken more serious from all the people in here you are trying to "win over".

---

A call A LIE as I see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spurminator

LOL celebrities. Maybe you should get your political commentary from somewhere other than US Weekly.

---

Indeed. I wouldn't give a bucket of warm spit for their preferences.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

Firemen inherit messes too. They generally don't pour gasoline on them.

---

What gasoline has the supposedly all-powerful Obama with a gas can poured on what fires?

Syria seems to be working out well for him. http://homerecording.com/bbs/images/...s/facepalm.gif


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-19345629

When the UN authorized the Syria bombing and the US joined the coalition, I said I was ok with it as long there were no troops on the ground... you simply can't do effective nation building without a full blown invasion, that's why I don't consider a bombing run that.

But if they want to find an excuse to send troops...:flipoff

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

When the UN authorized the Syria bombing and the US joined the coalition, I said I was ok with it as long there were no troops on the ground... you simply can't do effective nation building without a full blown invasion, that's why I don't consider a bombing run that.

But if they want to find an excuse to send troops...:flipoff

---

The chem line has been drawn in the sand.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

The chem line has been drawn in the sand.

---

Hopefully the weapons are visible and we don't need to wait for the translation of documents, tbh

This just in: CIA confirms existence of "Stealth" chemical weapons!

lol @ boutons getting pissed off after being completely owned...again

I just laugh at Obama lovers and supporters that are delusional and think he is a great president and is nothing like Bush. That ignorance is fascinating, amusing, and comical in my opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

The chem line has been drawn in the sand.

---

Russia and China drew theirs too. You're an idiot if you think you're going nation building in Syria without running into big trouble.

Saber rattling is all that will happen. When it comes down to it, they ain't that fuckin bold. They'll back off Syria.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TDMVPDPOY

either way ur force to vote for one of them

---

Since when?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

This just in: CIA confirms existence of "Stealth" chemical weapons!

---

I know, The Mirror and a totally anonymous source but someone's gotta be arming/training the FSA and foreign salafists, right?

R2P, per Sec'y Clinton . . .

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-n...tinger-1266487

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by johnsmith

Obama versus Romney......I'd rather just sit this one out.


Having said that, Obama versus Romney is almost a perfect metaphor for our fucked up, blue versue red political system....you know, the system that guys like boutons are in love with.

---

I would rather vote for Romney in hopes there might be a change. We already know what the other guy did. No hope, no change, a huge failure mixed in with a ton, I mean a ton of lies, (broken promises for those die hard blue bloods like my brother, George) so I'm going for the only alternative. Our system of blue vs red will not change anytime soon.....keep knocking the current seat holder out until it does. If anyone has a better solution let me in on it. I refuse to vote for someone we know is a failure. God bless

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob1983

I just laugh at Obama lovers and supporters that are delusional and think he is a great president and is nothing like Bush. That ignorance is fascinating, amusing, and comical in my opinion.

---

I find it disturbing and not a little ominous.

Conor Friedersdorf echoes the thought in The Atlantic:

Quote:

---

Barack Obama did win in 2008 running on a platform more liberal than the one he has pursued in the interim. Perhaps he couldn't move any farther left on immigration or health care and stay viable. But on national security, executive power, and civil-liberties issues, he campaigned and won handily repudiating Bush-era policies, only to govern to the "right" of the Bush Administration.


There wasn't a political imperative to do so. And I'm tired of that truth being obscured.



If liberals are going express horror at the GOP agenda as they enthusiastically support Obama's reelection, it's time for them to own his policies and stop trying to blame them on George W. Bush, or intransigent Republicans, or the financial crisis, or corporate campaign donations, or the desire to compromise, or an electorate that wasn't ready for the allegedly "knighted" Obama.


Barack Obama wasn't pressured to be executioner-in-chief. He asserted himself asarbiter of which human beings to kill without trial, at times far from any battlefield, sometimes without even knowing their identities. He decided to limit congressional oversight and totally exclude the judiciary.

House Speaker John Boehner didn't define militants as all men of military age that American drones kill. The Obama Administration did that.


Voters didn't clamor for an unprecedented war on whistleblowers. The Obama Administration decided to wage it.


An intransigent Congress didn't force the Obama Administration to make frequent use of the state-secrets privilege, or to keep Bradley Manning in solitary confinement, or to keep secret the legal memo that outlines the theory behind his extrajudicial assassination of American citizens.


No one made Obama violate the War Powers Resolution in Libya.


The president wouldn't suffer politically if he ordered the CIA to stop firing on rescuers who rush to the scene of drone strikes, or instructed the NSA to stop spying on the communications of American citizens suspected of no wrongdoing, or stopped turning military equipment over to police.


The American public wasn't clamoring for the naked body scans and genital pat-downs at the airport.


If liberals like Auster think that President Obama is preferable to Mitt Romney, even given all his flaws, they've got a plausible argument. But when liberals who describe the right's transgressions against civil liberties during the Bush era as horrific -- a label that is absolutely justified -- and nevertheless describe Obama as man with "knighted" notions, think his major problem is political ineptness, talk of respect for him, and desperately want him to win, I can't understand it.

Is his manner so agreeable that his actions count for nothing?

If Mitt Romney is elected, I foresee a liberal establishment that suddenly rediscovers the problems with executive power, the alarming precedents being set in the War on Terrorism, and the legal arguments against various national security policies. Whereas if Obama wins a second term, I fully expect many liberals to keep on presuming that he is a well-intentioned man who must be doing the best he can on these issues (given Republican intransigence and political constraints).

It took conservatives until several years into George W. Bush's second term to see that their champion wasn't in fact doing as well as could be expected given the circumstances. Liberals have a chance to confront the excesses of the man they've empowered sooner. The facts are right there.

Seeing them is uncomfortable but vital.

---

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...licies/261399/

Quote:

---

I would rather vote for Romney in hopes there might be a change.

---

Hopenchange!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jack sommerset

I would rather vote for Romney in hopes there might be a change.

---

The only thing Willard will ever change is his opinions on the campaign trail, tbh... Ron bless

These liberals just crack me up on their blind obedience and loyalty to Obama. Their loyalty and obedience is worse than the kind that Bush ever had. They come off like they're so paranoid and literally scared to death that if Romney becomes president, he's going to ban abortion and gay people in America. Really? Do you honestly think that will happen? Obama promised to close Gitmo. How'd that work out? Didn't Obama promise to have all the troops out of Iraq within the first two years of Iraq? How'd that work out?
It's false promises, dumbasses.

Won't be any change under Gecko. NatSec is a govt and nation unto itself

Who's Watching the N.S.A. Watchers?

IN March 2002, John M. Poindexter, a former national security adviser to President Ronald Reagan, sat down with Gen. Michael V. Hayden, the director of the National Security Agency. Mr. Poindexter sketched out a new Pentagon program called Total Information Awareness, that proposed to scan the world's electronic information - including phone calls, e-mails and financial and travel records - looking for transactions associated with terrorist plots. The N.S.A., the government's chief eavesdropper, routinely collected and analyzed such signals, so Mr. Poindexter thought the agency was an obvious place to test his ideas.

He never had much of a chance. When T.I.A.'s existence became public, it was denounced as the height of post-9/11 excess and ridiculed for its creepy name. Mr. Poindexter's notorious role in the Iran-contra affair became a central focus of the debate. He resigned from government, and T.I.A. was dismantled in 2003.

But what Mr. Poindexter didn't know was that the N.S.A. was already pursuing its own version of the program, and on a scale that he had only imagined. A decade later, the legacy of T.I.A. is quietly thriving at the N.S.A. It is more pervasive than most people think, and it operates with little accountability or restraint.

The foundations of this surveillance apparatus were laid soon after 9/11, when President George W. Bush authorized the N.S.A. to monitor the communications records of Americans who analysts suspected had a "nexus to terrorism." Acting on dubious legal authority, and without warrants, the N.S.A. began intercepting huge amounts of information.

But the N.S.A. came up with more dead ends than viable leads and put a premium on collecting information rather than making sense of it. The N.S.A. created what one senior Bush administration official later described as a "mirror" of AT&T's databases, which allowed ready access to the personal communications moving over much of the country's telecom infrastructure. The N.S.A. fed its bounty into software that created a dizzying social-network diagram of interconnected points and lines. The agency's software geeks called it "the BAG," which stood for "big ass graph."

Today, this global surveillance system continues to grow. It now collects so much digital detritus - e-mails, calls, text messages, cellphone location data and a catalog of computer viruses - that the N.S.A. is building a 1-million-square-foot facility in the Utah desert to store and process it.

What's missing, however, is a reliable way of keeping track of who sees what, and who watches whom. After T.I.A. was officially shut down in 2003, the N.S.A. adopted many of Mr. Poindexter's ideas except for two: an application that would "anonymize" data, so that information could be linked to a person only through a court order; and a set of audit logs, which would keep track of whether innocent Americans' communications were getting caught in a digital net.

The N.S.A. sorely needs such restrictions now. Under current law, it isn't allowed to monitor the communications of an American citizen or permanent resident without a court order. But it can collect data if one party to a communication is believed to be outside the United States. Recently, the office of the director of national intelligence admitted that on at least one occasion, the procedures that shield citizens' and legal residents' private information from spying eyes had been deemed "unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment" by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which oversees such monitoring.

Senator Ron Wyden, an Oregon Democrat, has questioned whether "backdoor" monitoring of citizens' communications is occurring. Intelligence officials told Mr. Wyden that they couldn't determine how many people inside the United States had their communications collected because checking the N.S.A.'s databases to find out would itself violate the privacy of those people. In other words, the protection of privacy rights is being invoked to cover up possible continuing violations of those same rights.

Why have we not seen the same level of public outrage as in 2003? Many Americans seem willing to give up their digital privacy if it means the government has a better chance of catching terrorists. Consider the revealing intelligence that millions of us give to Facebook - willingly. These days, we are more likely to be outraged by airport screening, and its public inconvenience and indignity, than by unseen monitoring.

Members of Congress rarely object because they don't want to be seen as obstructing legal surveillance. But whether this surveillance is legal, and verifiably so, is an open question, and depends upon a complex law that even most lawmakers don't understand. One can't easily mount an opposition to a confusing statute that governs a secretive process.

The law governing the N.S.A. can accommodate greater oversight, and if the agency thinks otherwise, it should be open to amending the law. Had the agency's leaders actually listened to everything Mr. Poindexter had to say, they might not find themselves telling the American people: "We're not spying on you. Trust us."

http://mobile.nytimes.com/article?a=...ub=Contributor

OBL is laughing his ass off screwing all those virgins. He gave the USA a chance, an excuse to screw itself, and it did, and it can't stop. Bend over is all anyone can do.

And the extreme right-wing Repug JINO SCOTUS says anybody can be strip searched for any minor offense. And multiple times if you're really really pretty.

lol deflection.

Syria. Got an answer? Which omnipresent VRWC talking point does this get assigned to?

VRWC conspiracy controls all, even Obama

Obama is a VRWC/MIC/1%er sock puppet just like the rest of us. just a placeholder to obscure our one dimensional political reality.

Don't make me post an essay.

Too late.

An essay on 1 percenter
Are you sitting comfortably? Advancments in 1 percenter can be linked to many areas. Until recently considered taboo amongst polite society, it is yet to receive proper recognition for laying the foundations of democracy. It is an unfortunate consequence of our civilizations history that 1 percenter is rarely given rational consideration by global commercial enterprises, who just don't like that sort of thing. Hold onto your hats as we begin a journey into 1 percenter.

Social Factors

Society begins and ends with 1 percenter. When The Tygers of Pan Tang sang 'It's lonely at the top. Everybody's trying to do you in' [1] , they, contrary to my learned colleague Sir George Allen’s recent publication ‘Into the eye of , could not have been referring to eighteenth century beliefs regarding society. While deviating from the norm will always cause unrest amongst ones peers, 1 percenter raises the question 'why?'

Status, Security, Fame - 1 percenter, all revolve around this 'golden fleece'. It breaks the mould, shattering man's misunderstanding of man.

Economic Factors

We no longer live in a world which barters 'I'll give you three cows for that hat, it’s lovely.' Our existance is a generation which cries 'Hat - $20.' We will study the Custard-Not-Mustard model, as is standard in this case.
Average
Wage

http://www.essaygenerator.com/images/graph_down_4.gif
1 percenter

Indisputably there is a link. How can this be explained? Recent studies indicate that the average wage will eventually break free from the powerful influence of 1 percenter, but not before we see a standardised commercial policy for all. Many analysts fear a subsequent depression.

Political Factors

Politics - smolitics! Contrasting the numerous political activists campaigning for the interests of 1 percenter can be like looking at pre and post war views of 1 percenter.

Take a moment to consider the words of the star of stage and screen Aaron T. Time 'You can lead a horse to water, big deal.' [2] Amazingly, he new nothing of 1 percenter until he was well into his thirties. If I may be as bold as to paraphrase, he was saying that 'political ideals are built on the solid cornerstone of 1 percenter.'

The question which we must each ask ourselves is, will we allow 1 percenter to win our vote?
Conclusion

We can say with certainty 1 percenter is both a need and a want. It brings peace, puts out 'fires', and is a joy to behold.

As a parting shot here are the words of super-star Britney Lennon: 'At first I was afraid I was petrified. Thinking I could never live without 1 percenter by my side.' [3]

[1] Tygers of Pang Tang - The Cage - 1982 MCR Records

[2] Time - Yes Indeed - 1987 Indegro Books

[3] My 1 percenter! - Issue 4 - BFG Publishing

:lol

More fun than a barrel of boutons.:lol

http://www.essaygenerator.com/

An essay on [email protected]

Issues surrounding [email protected] can never be over analysed. Advancments in [email protected] can be linked to many areas. Indispensable to homosapians today, [email protected] is not given the credit if deserves for inspiring many of the worlds famous painters. Inevitably [email protected] is often misunderstood by those most reliant on technology, many of whom blame the influence of television. Here begins my indepth analysis of the glourious subject of [email protected]

Social Factors

There is cultural and institutional interdependence between members of any community. Back when Vealinger reamarked ‘the power struggle will continue while the great tale of humanity remains untold’ [1] he saw clearly into the human heart. Spanning divides such as class, race and uglyness, [email protected] is crunchy on the outside but soft in the middle.

When one is faced with people of today a central theme emerges - [email protected] is either adored or despised, it leaves no one undecided. Society says that every man must find their own truth. While one sees [email protected], another may see monkeys playing tennis.

Economic Factors

Do we critique the markets, or do they in-fact critique us? We will begin by looking at the Spanish-Armada model, a classic economic system of analysis.

Average Wage http://www.essaygenerator.com/images/graph_up_2.gif

[email protected]

Clearly the graphs demonstrates a strong correlation. Why is this? Even a child could work out that the average wage cannot sustain this instability for long. Strong fluctuations in investor confidence have been seen over the past two financial years.

Political Factors

Politics has in some areas been seen to embrace an increasing ananiathesis of intergovernmentalism leading to neo-functionalism. Comparing [email protected] and much of what has been written of it can be like comparing pre and post war views of [email protected]

To quote the famous political Maximilian Rock 'I don't believe in ghosts, but I do believe in democracy.' [2] I couldn't have put it better my self. When it comes to [email protected] this is clearly true. If our political system can be seen as a cake, then [email protected] makes a good case for being the icing.

Since the Renaissance [email protected] has become more and more prevalent. May it continue.

Conclusion

What can we conclude? Well, [email protected] may not be the best thing since sliced bread, but it's still important. It enriches, puts out 'fires', and it is human.

Let's finish with a thought from star Whoopi Jackson: 'I wouldn't be where I am today without [email protected]' [3]

[1] Vealinger - Turtle Power - 2003 ICJ

[2] Rock - Roll It Up - 1977 - F. Lower Publishing

[3] Your [email protected] - Issue 43 - Never Ever Publishing

"Since the Renaissance [email protected] has become more and more prevalent. May it continue."

:lol:lol:toast

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob1983

Other than Glenn Greenwald, name a liberal that has bashed Obama on the NDAA, the Patriot Act, and civil liberties. Has George Clooney, Ben Affleck, Jared Leto, Mark Ruffalo, Sean Penn, Joy Behar, Angelina Jolie, Tom Hanks, Olivia Wilde, Will Smith, etc... said anything about it?
Matt Damon has bashed Obama but he did not mention the civil liberties crap. He basically said Obama didn't bring any hope and change to the table.

---

So your idea of political reading is People magazine.

Fantastic :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

"Since the Renaissance [email protected] has become more and more prevalent. May it continue."

:lol:lol:toast

---

This one cracked me up:

"While one sees [email protected], another may see monkeys playing tennis." :lmao

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

More fun than a barrel of boutons.:lol

http://www.essaygenerator.com/

---

:wow

It's like a translator that can turn boutons gibberish into something you can actually discuss.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons

And the extreme right-wing Repug JINO SCOTUS says anybody can be strip searched for any minor offense. And multiple times if you're really really pretty.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boutons, translated

It is an unfortunate consequence of our civilizations history that extreme right-wing Repug JINO SCOTUS is rarely given rational consideration by the over 50, who form the last great hope for our civilzation.

Nothing represents every day life better than extreme right-wing Repug JINO SCOTUS, and I mean nothing. It grows stonger every day.

Clearly the national debt world wide are driven entirely by extreme right-wing Repug JINO SCOTUS. What it all comes down to is money. Capitalists love extreme right-wing Repug JINO SCOTUS.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElNono

This one cracked me up:

"While one sees [email protected], another may see monkeys playing tennis." :lmao

---

Dont drag Manny into this!:ihit:lmao

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...45730684_n.jpg

guess you didn't read the Greenwald and Friedersdorf links upstream.

welcome to the conversation, SA210.

An essay on video game gold farming in China
In this essay I will consider the social, economic and political factors of video game gold farming in China. Underestimate video game gold farming in China at your peril. Until recently considered taboo amongst polite society, several of todays most brilliant minds seem incapable of recognising its increasing relevance to understanding future generations. Inevitably video game gold farming in China is often misunderstood by the aristocracy, who form the last great hope for our civilzation. Keeping all of this in mind, in this essay I will examine the major issues.
Social Factors
There is cultural and institutional interdependence between members of any community. Back when Vealinger reamarked ‘the power struggle will continue while the great tale of humanity remains untold’ [1] he must have been referning to video game gold farming in China. Much has been said about the influence of the media on video game gold farming in China. Observers claim it provides standards by which we may judge our selves.
Of paramount importance to any study of video game gold farming in China within its context, is understanding the ideals of society. Just as a dog will return to its own sick, society will return to video game gold farming in China, again and again.
Economic Factors
Is unemployment inherently bad for an economy? Yes. We shall examine the Spanish-Armada model, as is standard in this case. Transport
Costshttp://www.essaygenerator.com/images/graph_up_2.gif
video game gold farming in China
Indisputably there is a link. How can this be explained? It goes with out saying that transport costs, ultimately decided by politicians, will always be heavily influenced by video game gold farming in China due to its consistently high profile in the portfolio of investors. Assumptions made by traders have caused uncertainty amongst the private sector.
Political Factors
The media have made politics quite a spectacle. Looking at the spectrum represented by a single political party can be reminiscent of comparing video game gold farming in China and former Wolves striker Steve Bull. In the words of jazz singer Augstin B. Adger 'Political idealists must ideally deal, for I daily list my ideals politically.' [2] I couldn't have put it better my self. When it comes to video game gold farming in China this is clearly true. If our political system can be seen as a cake, then video game gold farming in China makes a good case for being the icing.
One thing's certain. The Human species liberally desires video game gold farming in China, and what's more human than politics?

Conclusion
In my opinion video game gold farming in China is both a need and a want. It fills a hole, ensures financial stability, though video game gold farming in China brings with it obvious difficulties, it is truly video game gold farming in China.
One final thought from the talented Justin Spielberg: 'I would say without a shadow of a doubt: video game gold farming in China ROCKS!!! [3]

[1] Vealinger - Turtle Power - 2003 ICJ
[2] Adger - Politics Per Day - 2000 Jinder Publishing [3] Weekly video game gold farming in China - Issue 54 - Rhino Media

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winehole23

guess you didn't read the Greenwald and Friedersdorf links upstream.

welcome to the conversation, SA210.

---

:lol

Just keeps getting better.:lol

Celebs like George Clooney, Jared Leto, and Olivia Wilde are probably not the best examples of Obama koolaid drinkers but they have one thing that Glenn Greenwald doesn't have. That thing is influence. Glenn Greenwald is correct about his criticism of Obama but it means nothing because no one gives a shit what he thinks. He isn't a big time tv star or movie star so his opinion, even though it's a well thought out intellectual one, doesn't hold that much weight.
Closed minded people see George Clooney worshiping Obama so they think it's cool and they will do it. Monkey see, monkey do.

His (Clooney) movie Good Night and Good Luck was pretty damn good.

Quote:

---

To delve deeply into Monkey see, monkey do is an exciting adventure. Many an afternoon has been enjoyed by a family, bonding over the discussion of Monkey see, monkey do. Until recently considered taboo amongst polite society, it is yet to receive proper recognition for laying the foundations of democracy. The juxtapositioning of Monkey see, monkey do with fundamental economic, social and political strategic conflict draws criticism from those politicaly minded individuals living in the past, who are yet to grow accustomed to its disombobulating nature. With the primary aim of demonstrating my considerable intellect I will now demonstrate the complexity of the many faceted issue that is Monkey see, monkey do.

Social Factors

Society begins and ends with Monkey see, monkey do. Upon Peter Pinkleton-PishPosh's return to Britain he remarked 'class will refelect the inner hero' [1], he failed to understand that if one seriously intends to 'not judge a book by its cover', then one must read a lot of books. While deviating from the norm will always cause unrest amongst ones peers, Monkey see, monkey do irons out misconceptions from our consciousness.
Did I mention how lovely Monkey see, monkey do is? It breaks the mould, shattering man's misunderstanding of man.

Economic Factors

Do we critique the markets, or do they in-fact critique us? We will begin by looking at the Inter-Spam model, which I hope will be familiar to most readers.

Average

Wage http://www.essaygenerator.com/images/graph_down_2.gif


Monkey see, monkey do

Clearly the graphs demonstrates a strong correlation. Why is this? Recent studies indicate that the average wage plays in increasingly important role in the market economy. The economic policy spectrum is seeing a period of unprecedented growth.

Political Factors

Politics, we all agree, is a fact of life. Placing theory on the scales of justice and weighing it against practice can produce similar results to contrasting pre and post war views of Monkey see, monkey do.

To quote that most brilliant mind Elijah Skank 'consciousness complicates a myriad of progressions.' [2] This clearly illustrates the primary concern of those involved with Monkey see, monkey do. If our political system can be seen as a cake, then Monkey see, monkey do makes a good case for being the icing.

Is Monkey see, monkey do politically correct, in every sense? Each man, woman and to a lesser extent, child, must make up their own mind.

Conclusion

In summary, Monkey see, monkey do has a special place in the heart of mankind. It brings peace, invades where necessary and always chips in.
What a great essay. Finally a word from super-star Keanu Morissette: 'I wouldn't be where I am today without Monkey see, monkey do.' [3]

[1] Flankton - The Complete History - 1999 Fantastico Publishing
[2] Skank - Politics for Dummies - PV6 Media
[3] Everything you always wanted to know about Monkey see, monkey do, but were afraid to ask. - Issue 287 - QKS Publishing

---

Quote:

---

Are you sitting comfortably? I find my self constantly drawn back to the subject of Obama koolaid drinkers. While it has been acknowledged that it has an important part to play in the development of man, its influence on western cinema has not been given proper recognition. It is an unfortunate consequence of our civilizations history that Obama koolaid drinkers is rarely given rational consideration by the aristocracy, obviously. Relax, sit back and gasp as I display the rich tapestries of Obama koolaid drinkers.



Social Factors

As Reflected in classical mythology society is complicated. When Thucictholous said 'people only know one thing' [1] he shead new light on Obama koolaid drinkers, allowing man to take it by the hand and understand its momentum. Difference among people, race, culture and society is essential on the survival of our world, however Obama koolaid drinkers demonstrates a coherent approach, something so lacking in our culture, that it is not recognised by all.



Of paramount importance to any study of Obama koolaid drinkers within its context, is understanding the ideals of society. If society has a favourite child, it is Obama koolaid drinkers.
Economic Factors

Derived from 'oikonomikos,' which means skilled in household management, the word economics is synonymous with Obama koolaid drinkers. We shall examine the JTB-Guide-Dog model using the median instead of the mean, where possible.



Market
Value
Of
Gold http://www.essaygenerator.com/images/graph_up_1.gif


Obama koolaid drinkersThe statistics make it clear that Obama koolaid drinkers is a major market factor. Clearly the market value of gold has always depended upon Obama koolaid drinkers to a certain extent, but now more that ever. Strong fluctuations in investor confidence have been seen over the past two financial years.



Political Factors

Posturing as concerned patriarchs, many politicians guide the electorate herd to the inevitable cattle shed of 'equal opportunity.' Politicians find it difficult to choose between what has become known in politics as - 'The two ways' - Obama koolaid drinkersism and post-Obama koolaid drinkersism.


Take a moment to consider the words of jazz singer Maximilian B. Adger 'I don't believe in ghosts, but I do believe in democracy.' [2] This quotation leads me to suspect that he was not unaccustomed to Obama koolaid drinkers. It speaks volumes. Perhaps the word which sums up the importance of Obama koolaid drinkers to politics is 'participation'.


I hope, for our sake that Obama koolaid drinkers will endure.

Conclusion

We can conclude that the Obama koolaid drinkers must not be allowed to get in the way of the bigger question: why are we here? Putting this aside its of great importance. It establishes order, 'literally' plants seeds for harvest, and most importantly it perseveres.


The final say goes to the award winning Wyclef Schwarzenegger: 'I demand Obama koolaid drinkers, nothing more nothing less.' [3]
[1] Thucictholous - Man - Published 42 AD
[2] Adger - Politics Per Day - 2000 Jinder Publishing
[3] Smashing Hits - Issue 224 - Jazz Media

---

:toast:lol:lol:lol I effin' love these things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeyshaBlue

:toast:lol:lol:lol I effin' love these things.

---

TB just found the new NBA forum spammer... :lol

this is a great thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LnGrrrR

TB just found the new NBA forum spammer... :lol

---

Im a giver.:lol

Another interesting thing about the die hard Obama supporters and lovers is how they 100 percent supportive of Obama when it comes to the Patriot Act, the NDAA, Gitmo still being around, and drone attacks as long as they get their way on social issues. If homos and lesbians are allowed to get married, every female American gets free birth control pills and abortions, and illegal immigrants get handouts then Obama's foreign policy which is identical to Bush is okay. Free abortions and birth control pills and gay marriage are the most important issues right now. They are more important than poor people, blind people, people in the Middle East being killed by U.S. drone attacks, people with AIDS or cancer, the jobless, the homeless, and anyone else.

http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...42062864_n.jpg

u guys love to give him shit, but coalition allied leaders who participated in the wars past decade got away scape goat free....

dunno why is there a double standard when it comes to bringing ppl to justice when it comes to war crimes.....if you win the war, u get a free pass......that pass card also has an expiry date when ur overthrown and thats when they bring up backdated charges against you for a case to be served...

you lose the war, u get a first seat over there in the hague...

oh, we won?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jacob1983

Another interesting thing about the die hard Obama supporters and lovers is how they 100 percent supportive of Obama when it comes to the Patriot Act, the NDAA, Gitmo still being around, and drone attacks as long as they get their way on social issues. If homos and lesbians are allowed to get married, every female American gets free birth control pills and abortions, and illegal immigrants get handouts then Obama's foreign policy which is identical to Bush is okay. Free abortions and birth control pills and gay marriage are the most important issues right now. They are more important than poor people, blind people, people in the Middle East being killed by U.S. drone attacks, people with AIDS or cancer, the jobless, the homeless, and anyone else.

---

homosexuality ain't a problem at all, nor is the use of contraceptive pills, america doesn't need any natural births since it can pretty much keep the balance of population with an increasing number of LEGAL immigrants year by year. LEGAL immigrants are mostly humble and gentle guys with all knowledge and skills this country needs, and for sure they're more welcome than those spoiled cubs born to american couples.

just make it even easier for foreigners to immigrate and probably within a few years the US will also have a population of more than one billion, whom the government can reap a hell lot of taxes from, even though that'll ostensibly lower the living standards of you people who've already become "americans"