Toad on a Hat posted:

Actually I read a piece that says the opinion's a good thing for Democratic candidates because it takes the gun rights issue off the table as a wedge issue for Republicans.

UltraPenguinX posted:

Err, I'm no expert on religions, but is there any validity to this? I think that there's some stuff in there about women being inferior to men, but the whole "kill everyone who is not muslim" as their main tenant seems a bit far fetched.

ManoliIsFat posted:

They've only got a dozen other ones.

Toad on a Hat posted:

Actually I read a piece that says the opinion's a good thing for Democratic candidates because it takes the gun rights issue off the table as a wedge issue for Republicans.

Turing sex machine posted:

Self-censorship that doesn't actually censor anything

Childlike Empress posted:

Oh hey, an e-mail from mom. Oh sh

quote:

NEW YORK CITY was a form of the internet years before the real one came along.

chesh posted:

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

hahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahaha how did you all miss this gem?

quote:

Worth reading. Not that it’s likely to happen. Just a mood notice.



Buzz


Constitutional Convention
Governors of 35 states have already
filed suit against the Federal Government for imposing unlawful burdens upon them. It only takes 38 (1½ of the 50) States to convene a
Constitutional Convention.

Really important! Hope you all do it!

This will take less than thirty seconds to read. If you agree, please pass it on.

An idea whose time has come;

For too long we have been too complacent about the workings of Congress. Many citizens had no idea that members of Congress could retire with the same pay after only one term, that they didn't pay into Social Security, that they specifically exempted themselves from many of the laws they have passed (such as being exempt from any fear of prosecution for sexual harassment) while ordinary citizens must live under those laws. The latest is to exempt themselves from the Healthcare Reform that is being considered...in all of its forms. Somehow, that doesn't seem logical. We do not have an elite that is above the law. I truly don't care if they are Democrat, Republican, Independent or whatever. The self-serving must stop. This is a good way to do that. It is an idea whose time has come.

Have each person contact a minimum of Twenty people on their Address list, in turn ask each of those to do likewise.

In three days, most people in The United States of America will have the message. This is one proposal that really should be passed around.


Proposed 28th Amendment to
the United States Constitution

"Congress shall make no law that
applies to the citizens of the United States that does not apply equally
to the Senators and/or Representatives; and, Congress shall make no
law that applies to the Senators and/or Representatives that does not apply equally to the citizens of the United States ."



You are one of my

20+.

Please

If you love this Country,

Send this (as I have done) to absolutely everyone

Whose email address appears in your address book..
This thing can permeate this Country in no time.

Let's make it happen.**

VOTE THE POWER ABUSERS OUT...

LET'S TAKE AMERICA BACK !!! or

IF YOU LIKE THE WAY THINGS ARE GOING IN OUR COUNTRY,

THEN DO NOTHING...

quote:

Ther rest of the story:

Channel-surfing from ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN through MSNBC
and Fox News, the inside-the-beltway pundits had a field day
trying to get inside the heads of Barack Obama, Joe Biden,
General Stanley McChrystal, and McChrystal’s top aides.
The one thing common to all of the analyses, by the most
famous and highly-paid talking heads in the Western World,
was that they are all wrong… dead wrong. What is certain
is that they all owe General McChrystal and his senior aides
an apology for assuming that they are lame-brained
numbskulls.

The facts of the McChrystal case are not in dispute.
General McChrystal and his senior officers allowed a
reporter for Rolling Stone Magazine, Michael Hastings, to
have almost unprecedented access during an extended stay in
Paris. The extended stay was due, in part, to an excess of
atmospheric ash from Iceland’s Eyjafjallajokull volcano,
keeping the McChrystal party grounded for days.

In an interview with CNN, Hastings reported that he had a
tape recorder in his hand most of the time and that
McChrystal was “very aware” that his comments would find
their way into print. He said, “McChrystal and his people
set no ground rules for their conversations, although they
did ask that some parts of their conversations were off the
record.” Hastings subsequently published a lengthy profile
of General McChrystal on June 22, titled, The Runaway
General.

As Hastings wrote in his profile, McChrystal thought that
Obama looked “uncomfortable and intimidated” by the
roomful of military brass during their first meeting.
Of their second meeting, an advisor to McChrystal quoted the
general as saying that it was “a 10-minute photo
op.” He went on to say, “Obama clearly didn’t
know anything about (McChrystal), who he was. Here’s
the guy who’s going to run his f_ _ _ing war, but he
didn’t seem very engaged. The Boss was pretty
disappointed.”
As General McChrystal flew from Afghanistan to Washington
to face Obama in the Oval Office, the almost unanimous
opinion of the talking heads was that the comments made by
McChrystal and his staff were off the cuff and inadvertent.
But to believe that is to totally ignore who these men are.


General McChrystal and his top officers are not
simple-minded, knuckle-dragging brutes. To the contrary,
they are intelligent, thoughtful, highly educated,
patriots… graduates of West Point and other fine
universities… who are dedicated to duty, honor, and
country. To think that such men would be so careless as to
speak unflatteringly of Obama, Biden, and other top
administration figures, in the presence of a reporter for a
notoriously left wing publication, defies logic… at the
very least. To think that men who are trained to be careful
and deliberate in everything they do, could do something so
careless and so unguarded is simply beyond comprehension.

I would argue that McChrystal and his aides knew exactly
what they were doing.

From the day that he became the handpicked “spear
carrier” for Obama’s unique brand of warfare… playing
at being Commander in Chief while playing to his far left
constituency… McChrystal’s life had been one of constant
frustration. After telling Obama exactly how many troops he
needed to carry out his mission, Obama dithered for months
before deciding to give him just half the troops he
requested. McChrystal could not have been happy about that.

The Obama team insisted on new Rules of Engagement designed
to reduce collateral damage (civilian casualties).
Obama’s ROE required that U.S. troops must be able to see
the enemy with weapon in hand before they were allowed to
return fire. One videotape circulated on the Internet showed
a platoon of Marines pinned down by enemy sniper fire. But
since the enemy was firing from some distance behind the
open window of a building, the Marines could not actually
see the weapon being fired. Although they were taking deadly
fire, they were prohibited by the ROE from putting small
arms fire or an RPG through the window opening.

Under Obama’s politically correct ROE, our soldiers and
Marines were required to fight with one hand tied behind
their backs. McChrystal could not have been happy
about that.
>
A strict new interrogation policy, dictated by Attorney
General Eric Holder, required that prisoners must be
delivered to an Interrogation Center within twenty-four
hours of being captured or or be released. A great deal of
actionable intelligence was lost as a result and
battle-hardened enemy fighters were returned to the field to
kill Americans. McChrystal must have found that to be
incomprehensible.

> But the greatest insult to our troops in the field, and to
the officers who lead them, may be a new battlefield medal
designed by the Obama team. It is called the Courageous
Restraint Medal and is awarded to soldiers and Marines who
demonstrate uncommon restrain in combat by not firing their
weapons even when they feel threatened by the enemy. Would
we be surprised to learn that the preponderance of these
medals were awarded posthumously? McChrystal must have
found that to be an insanity.

I suggest that, having his best military judgments
subjected to the White House political sieve for nearly a
year and a half, McChrystal decided that he’d had enough.
And when he announced to his senior staff that he was
prepared to retire they decided to push back… to make the
most of a bad situation. It was clear that, if McChrystal
were to simply take off his uniform and walk away, his
retirement would be page-twenty news for a day or two before
the mainstream media and the American people forgot all
about him.

They had to make the most of his retirement because it
provided a one-time opportunity to show the American people,
as well as our enemies and our allies, that the man who
claims the title of Commander in Chief of the U.S. military
does not command the respect of our men and women in
uniform. To make the most of that opportunity they had to
choose their messenger very carefully.

They knew that, by openly showing their disrespect for
Obama in front of just any newsman, they may not attract the
attention they desired. Like any astute observer of the MSM,
they knew that most reporters would turn on their own
mothers if it meant a good story. But they could not take a
chance that a mainstream media reporter might suffer a rare
pang of conscience when confronted with the prospect of
ruining the careers of some of the most senior officers in
the War on Terror. They had to fix the odds as much as
possible in their favor so they chose to use Michael
Hastings and Rolling Stone Magazine.

During the long hours that General McChrystal was in the
air between Kabul and Washington, Obama knew that he had
just two choices… both bad. He could declare McChrystal to
be an irreplaceable asset in the war effort, give him a
public reprimand, and send him back to Kabul. Or he could
fire McChrystal, sending a clear message that, at least in
his own mind, he was the Commander in Chief.

In the former case, he was certain to appear weak and
ineffectual… a man not totally in charge. In the latter
case, he might at least win a few rave reviews from the
Kook-Ade drinkers in the mainstream media. He chose the
latter of the two options.

But what is now lost in all of the hand-wringing and
speculation is the fact that McChrystal and his people have
succeeded in doing exactly what they set out to do. They
wanted to plant the seed in the minds of the American people
that Obama is not up to the task of being Commander in Chief
and that he does not command the respect of the men and
women of the uniformed services… from the newest Private
E-1 up to the top four-star generals and admirals.

That seed is now firmly planted and it cannot be unplanted.

>
From this day forward, no one will have to tell the
American people that Stanley McChrystal is a true warrior
man’s man, and that Barack Obama is nothing more than a…
community organizer. Well done, General!
>
>
> http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.6581/pub_detail.asp
>
>

Shimrra Jamaane posted:

hahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahaha how did you all miss this gem?

Mordiceius posted:

All aboard the McChrystal train!

quote:

McChrystal has no defense. How frustrating must it be for a normally intelligent person to bad mouth the most powerful man in the world. There will be no wining of this so called war. It wouldn't be good for business. War creates jobs and makes millionaires. The last war to have a conclusion was WWII. Then the political powers that be screwed it up by splitting up Germany. At least Japan surrendered to the invading force. As long as politicians run the wars, there will be no satisfying conclusion.

Vilerat posted:

The email I got from my right wing old person fw:fw: connection wasn't supportive of Mcchrystal at all.

quote:

As long as politicians run the wars, there will be no satisfying conclusion.

I think.

Mordiceius posted:

Under Obama’s politically correct ROE, our soldiers and
Marines were required to fight with one hand tied behind
their backs. McChrystal could not have been happy
about that.

quote:

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has directed the military services to adopt a set of counterinsurgency tools modeled after ones instituted in Afghanistan by Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, said a senior Pentagon official.

Gates signed a directive on Monday ordering the services to “take McChrystal’s COIN training and proficiency standards ... and adapt those for the whole force,” Garry Reid, deputy assistant secretary of defense for special operations and combat terrorism, told Defense News on Tuesday.

quote:

"The Obama team insisted on new Rules of Engagement designed
to reduce collateral damage (civilian casualties).
Obama’s ROE required that U.S. troops must be able to see
the enemy with weapon in hand before they were allowed to
return fire. One videotape circulated on the Internet showed
a platoon of Marines pinned down by enemy sniper fire. But
since the enemy was firing from some distance behind the
open window of a building, the Marines could not actually
see the weapon being fired. Although they were taking deadly
fire, they were prohibited by the ROE from putting small
arms fire or an RPG through the window opening."

RagnarokAngel posted:

I love "government types dont understand obvious flaws in their stupid plans even when shown video footage. They just dont get war, not like me a 35 year old construction worker."

BonoMan posted:

Part of it is because there are people who do abuse the system and what happens is people see them receiving thousands of dollars in checks they feel they shouldn't be getting and then think that all of a sudden they're cashing thousand dollar checks every other day or something. People getting 5 thousand dollars a year they probably shouldn't be getting DOES suck, but that's not a lot money to really do anything with in the long run.

quote:

Happy 4th of July, whether you lean right or left politically, this is still the greatest nation in the world, flaws and all.


Have you ever wondered what happened to the 56 men

who signed the Declaration of Independence ?

Five signers were captured by the British as traitors,

and tortured before they died.

Twelve had their homes ransacked and burned.

Two lost their sons serving in the Revolutionary Army;

another had two sons captured.

Nine of the 56 fought and died from wounds or

hardships of the Revolutionary War.

They signed and they pledged their lives, their fortunes,

and their sacred honor.

What kind of men were they?

Twenty-four were lawyers and jurists.

Eleven were merchants,

nine were farmers and large plantation owners;

men of means, well educated,

but they signed the Declaration of Independence

knowing full well that the penalty would be death if

they were captured.

Carter Braxton of Virginia, a wealthy planter and

trader, saw his ships swept from the seas by the

British Navy. He sold his home and properties to

pay his debts, and died in rags.

Thomas McKeam was so hounded by the British

that he was forced to move his family almost constantly.

He served in the Congress without pay, and his family

was kept in hiding. His possessions were taken from him,

and poverty was his reward.

Vandals or soldiers looted the properties of Dillery, Hall, Clymer,

Walton, Gwinnett, Heyward, Ruttledge, and Middleton.

At the battle of Yorktown , Thomas Nelson, Jr., noted that

the British General Cornwallis had taken over the Nelson

home for his headquarters. He quietly urged General

George Washington to open fire. The home was destroyed,

and Nelson died bankrupt.

Francis Lewis had his home and properties destroyed.

The enemy jailed his wife, and she died within a few months.

John Hart was driven from his wife's bedside as she was dying.

Their 13 children fled for their lives. His fields and his gristmill

were laid to waste. For more than a year he lived in forests

and caves, returning home to find his wife dead and his

children vanished.

So, take a few minutes while enjoying your 4th of July holiday and

silently thank these patriots. It's not much to ask for the price they paid.

Remember: freedom is never free!

I hope you will show your support by sending this to as many

people as you can, please. It's time we get the word out that patriotism

is NOT a sin, and the Fourth of July has more to it than beer,

picnics, and baseball games.

Patter Song posted:

Just got this from my dad. Just sent back a link to Snopes.

UltraPenguinX posted:

I don't really have a problem with this. Sure, it's probably not true, but it wasn't overtly "DEM LIBRALS" or anything. That being said,

having phrases

that have line breaks between

them with no real rhyme or reason

as to how they're broken make

things very difficult to read

and string together, know

what I mean?

Tardstar posted:

i have hard time seeing peoples trouble with this because i'm British and there's no way you could even live on 5000 dollars a year in Britain. I'm guessing even in the US they only just manage it.

RagnarokAngel posted:

Naw it's not just $5000, you couldnt do that here unless you lived in the mountains or something. I believe he means in addition.

Tardstar posted:

i have hard time seeing peoples trouble with this because i'm British and there's no way you could even live on 5000 dollars a year in Britain. I'm guessing even in the US they only just manage it.

BonoMan posted:

Yeah no I didn't mean "in total" ..I meant in addition to.

And sorry fishmech, but it's crazy easy to abuse the system and get more than that a year. Not a LOT more mind you, but people with kids can amass a couple grand more than that per month. But like I said...it doesn't equate to some high living. It's pretty lovely honestly.

RagnarokAngel posted:

I assume that doesn't include food stamps etc.?

I apologize for my ignorance and this isn't a "drat lazy poor getting free money" post just you couldnt pay rent with that money let alone feed and clothe yourself.

RagnarokAngel posted:

Not really getting the answer I need so I ask it.
How does anyone live on that when the poverty line is like 20k?

RagnarokAngel posted:

Not really getting the answer I need so I ask it.
How does anyone live on that when the poverty line is like 20k?

Department of Health and Human Services posted:

[b]

pre:

The 2009 Poverty Guidelines for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia.

     Persons in family 	           Poverty guideline

            1 	                         $10,830
            2 	                          14,570
            3 	                          18,310
            4 	                          22,050
            5 	                          25,790
            6 	                          29,530

RagnarokAngel posted:

Not really getting the answer I need so I ask it.
How does anyone live on that when the poverty line is like 20k?

Hardcore Phonography posted:

The idea behind food stamps, as it is currently implemented, is that it's supposed to expand on an already available food budget, i.e., in addition to income. With the unemployed, it basically becomes the entire food budget, especially with families that have one wage earner where that person is now jobless.

There are a lot of other support systems available, but as has already been said, they're temporary. There's TANF - Temporary Assistance for Needy Families - Section 8 housing assistance, Medicaid, Food Banks, Energy Assistance Grants, etc. Some of it works as intended, some of it doesn't.

A lot of policies built around public assistance seem to be designed (and they're not, it's just the way they come across) to ensure a maximum level of poverty for the maximum period of time. The entire system needs to be overhauled and geared towards extended relief and assistance, not making GBS threads on people who are in the system who actually make progress.

RagnarokAngel posted:

Thank you this is what I was asking. I think fishmech got the impression I was trying to coax him to admit that those on welfare live comfortably so I could prove welfare permitted people to exploit it easily.

Habibi posted:

Does anyone know anything about this: 'Six Months to go until the largest tax hike in history? My cousin just forwarded me the link with the disclaimer "If we overlook the right wing rhetoric, this article breaks down some of the upcoming tax situation in laymen terms. Are taxes way too loving high or what?" I'm tempted to respond that if we overlook the right wing rhetoric we might be looking at a blank page, but I can't find any information on this outside of (surprise) really right wing sites.

quote:

"Joe Legal" and
"Jose Illegal".