Author Topic: Repub states "A free press undermines our country" (Read 3083 times)

uvwpvW · « **Reply #75 on:** June 29, 2006, 07:16:43 PM »

I foresee a future not so distant where the Hangtimes of America openly or covertly rebels against the government. Only to be betrayed to the black suited goons of Homeland Security by the Ripsnorts of America, who get nice "diamond clusters" or "oak leaves and swords" to their party membership buttons.

storch · « **Reply #76 on:** June 29, 2006, 07:47:15 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Maverick
That is a foolish stance to take. Not all threats are those that can be resolved with the implementation of simple force to a single target.

mav with all due respect to law enforcement personnel. after many years of having the local constabulary come on by the shop and ask for stuff to be fabricated, drink my beer (always after hours) and have a shady place to park their scooters as they catch the daily quota I have come away with this impression, perhaps I'm mistaken as I occassionally am.

1. law enforcement personnel will take care of themselves first
2. each other next
3. the general public bye and bye

mind you that I count it as a plus to have them on my side because in my town I can do no wrong. they all know me and I have taken the time to carefully and respectfully cultivate the relationships but they do not inspire much confidence.

just saying

Hangtime · « **Reply #77 on:** June 29, 2006, 08:15:59 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by uvwpvW
Only to be betrayed to the black suited goons of Homeland Security by the Ripsnorts of America, who get nice "diamond clusters" or "oak leaves and swords" to their party membership buttons.

and a nice tax break on their oil stock portfolios.

midnight Target · « **Reply #78 on:** June 29, 2006, 08:27:03 PM »

Bank Data Is Sifted by U.S. in Secret to Block Terror

Maybe some folks should read the article before jumping to conclusions.

It is actually pretty straight forward and even a little complimentary.

Quote

Viewed by the Bush administration as a vital tool, the program has played a hidden role in domestic and foreign terrorism investigations since 2001 and helped in the capture of the most wanted Qaeda figure in Southeast Asia

Maverick · « **Reply #79 on:** June 29, 2006, 09:33:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
mav with all due respect to law enforcement personnel. after many years of having the local constabulary come on by the shop and ask for stuff to be fabricated, drink my beer (always after hours) and have a shady place to park their scooters as they catch the daily quota I have come away with this impression, perhaps I'm mistaken as I occassionally am.

1. law enforcement personnel will take care of themselves first
2. each other next
3. the general public bye and bye

mind you that I count it as a plus to have them on my side because in my town I can do no wrong. they all know me and I have taken the time to carefully and respectfully cultivate the relationships but they do not inspire much confidence.

just saying

Storch,

No disrespect intended or taken. Read what I said again. I wasn't talking about a single one on one situation. There are far more ways you could be a victim that cannot be handled by going out and fighting or worse with a suspect. For that you need additional resources in the legal world that would instead be set against you if you act unilateraly. The high noon solution is rather rare.

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #80 on:** July 03, 2006, 06:18:52 PM »

You know this thread convinced me. This November I'm voting Democratic.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi reaffirms the Democratic Party’s promise to remain marginalized.

Quote

"We are entirely capable of bungling this opportunity to regain control of the House and Senate and the trust of the American people," Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) said to scattered applause. "It will take some doing, but we're in this for the long and pointless haul."

"We can lose this," Reid added. "All it takes is a little lack of backbone."

Despite plummeting poll numbers for the G.O.P nationwide and an upcoming election in which all House seats and 33 Senate seats are up for contention, Democrats pledged to maintain their party's sheepish resignation.

"In times like these, when the American public is palpably dismayed with the political status quo, it is crucial that Democrats remain unfocused and defer to the larger, smarter, and better-equipped Republican machine," House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) said. "If we play our cards right, we will be intimidated to the point of total paralysis."

bj229r · « **Reply #81 on:** July 03, 2006, 07:25:33 PM »

Obama , maybe Evan Bahye(?) puts a lot more uplifting face on the party...the current heads of Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Dick Durban don't do much to inspire people to follow them

Gunston · « **Reply #82 on:** July 06, 2006, 02:42:16 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nash
Quite right, Thud.

And when he says: "what pathetic pampered suburbanites we have collectively become," he is talking about himself.

"Collective" my arse.

What you are starting to witness is the internal rumble that's beginning to materialize in the minds of the people who got so thoroughly duped.

They thought they were smarter than that.

They cannot believe that it happend to them!

So they sit here and try to say that: "OMG - It's the fault of soccer moms!"

or.... "All government is bad! Screw them all!".... when it was the Republicans alone who screwed them.

It's a temper tantrum, and ya gotta kind of let it play out. Once they've brushed the sleep out of their eyes, kicked the walls in a few times, then maybe they'll start talking sense.

Nash

You seem to think that everyone who voted for Bush wishes they hadn't and are looking for someone to "blame". I can tell you that I for one am very happy and proud to have voted for him. I completely support the war in Iraq and consider it a huge success. As for the reasons to invade, I believe that Bush, just like Clinton, Kerry, Blair and everyone else in the world knew and still know that Saddam was in violation af the many UN resolutions drafted after the Gulf War (I have read them all have you?) Any infraction including shooting at aircraft patroling the no-fly zones was enough to allow any member nation to launch miltary operations against Iraq without prior approval of the security council. But no nation including the US exercised that right during the 90's. Instead the UN just kept making new "this is your last chance" resolutions (14 in all) which made the UN look, as they are, weak and meaningless in world affairs. I could go on about the WMD's, the support for terrorist, etc. etc. all of which are true but my real point is I don't care if they were true or not I would be just as happy if they were in fact lies because we now have a military pressence in the Middle East and I hope we keep troops in that part of the world for many years to come. We are no longer seen by the terrorist and other Rouge Nations as the weak knee run at the first shot cowards, they thought we were when Clinton pulled us out of Somilia after Bin Laden and his thugs killed and dragged our brave soldiers naked in the streets (yes Bin Laden was there and involved). I don't believe there would have been a 9-11 or the current war if we had shown any resolve at that time. So go on believing all you Liberal talking points but I hope that when history shows that Bush was right, and the Middle East is peaceful, prosperous and free and Bush is hailed as one of the great leaders of history that you are alive to see it and you tell your Grand kids or great Grand kids the truth about yourself instead of something like "yea I was behind him all the way" so you won't look to them like the fool that you are.

Debonair · « **Reply #83 on:** July 06, 2006, 03:09:21 AM »

pwnd by a three year old shade account rofl

RedRadr · « **Reply #84 on:** July 06, 2006, 12:25:04 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hap
Winning an election does not create knowledge, rectitude, wisdom, etc.

~~hap~~ [/QUOTE

man, thas deep hap

Shifty · « **Reply #85 on:** July 06, 2006, 03:01:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by storch
well now before you completely melt down......again. what would collectively being at fault mean to you? That would be all of us at fault (not you of course, you don't count for much as you are not an American). we have as nation consistently ceded our rights either through apathy or ignorance with our votes, or a lack thereof.

In modern times the president who has held the most profound and sweeping powers of intruding into the private lives of the average American was FDR. the abuses of power by this administration were legion and had a detrimental global effect. you can place the blame for the cold war, runaway inflation, massive national debt, the massive coachroach infestation of New York/New Jersey and communist infiltration of the highest levels of our government squarely on this three times re-elected demagog.

now who elected and then three times re-elected this bright star to office and for what reason? who do we blame? with regard to President Bush, I have revised my opinion of the president as is my prerogative to do because of his performance during this second term. having typed that, given the choices in the last two elections, if I could return to 2000 and 2004 knowing what I know now I would still cast my vote for him, seeing him as the lesser of two idiots in both of those elections. had either of those two seething weezing masses of wasted breath opposition candidates been elected I firmly believe we would be far worse off than we are now. I'm sure I don't have to ask you what you think, I can guess.

WTFG Storch!

Dago · « **Reply #86 on:** July 06, 2006, 03:26:37 PM »

Wow dos equis, you really twist the mans words to make it look a lot worse. Basically, you posted a lie as the subject line. You must be a liberal democrat, as pretty much everything they say or believe is based on lies. Fitting the mold, you walk the walk.

The man objects to a media outlet divulging a classified program being used to fight terrorism and protect the American public, and you turn it all around. Sad.

How many people see this typical demodork crap and come to the realization that demodorks are sad and desperate fools? More than a few I would guess.

midnight Target · « **Reply #87 on:** July 06, 2006, 03:55:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Dago
Wow dos equis, you really twist the mans words to make it look a lot worse. Basically, you posted a lie as the subject line. You must be a liberal democrat, as pretty much everything they say or believe is based on lies. Fitting the mold, you walk the walk.

The man objects to a media outlet divulging a classified program being used to fight terrorism and protect the American public, and you turn it all around. Sad.

How many people see this typical demodork crap and come to the realization that demodorks are sad and desperate fools? More than a few I would guess.

typical

Shuckins · « **Reply #88 on:** July 06, 2006, 04:30:50 PM »

Midnight,

Look again at the title of the New York Times article: Bank Date is Sifted In Secret To Block Terror.

If it truly was a secret program, and successful in its tracking of terrorists, then what in Heaven's name was the Times or any other paper, foreign or domestic, doing reporting it?

The mantra trotted out to defend the Times in this instance is the tired one of "the people's right to know."

Please explain exactly WHY I needed to know THIS? There was no reason to believe that government officials were doing anything other than following the money trail of terrorists.

This is just another example of media irresponsibility and ****lessness. What purpose could the Times have had other than to embarass the current administration? Much of the major media considers the Bush administration's anti-terrorism activities to be a greater threat than foreign sponsored terrorism. So, they print information that knocks the props from under a useful program in tracking the activities of terrorists.

Seeing themselves as defenders of the law, the media believes itself to be above it. The greatest defenders of the press admit that there should be limits beyond which the media should not go, and yet they never seem to find a case where the media have exceeded them.

The benefit of the doubt during wartime should work against such disclosures; in the eyes of most reporters and editors, apparently, it now lies heavily in the other direction.

Granted, it is important to have an independent press that is more adversarial than compliant...for democratic governments require watchdogs.

But there is a profound difference between performing the necessary function of informing the public and going out of one's way to undermine programs that any reasonable person would consider useful for safeguarding the nation's security.

If the media help to check the power of government, but the media cannot be prosecuted by the government for clear-cut cases of wrongdoing, then what checks the media?

(A summary and paraphrased version of an article in The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, by Bradley R. Gitz.)

Dago · « **Reply #89 on:** July 06, 2006, 06:27:01 PM »

You want to know what is really ironic about this whole mess?

Right after 9/11, the NYT suggested things that needed to be done to track and stop terrorists, and tracking their money was one of the things they suggested that needed to be done.

I personally would take great joy in seeing the editor and publisher of the NYT prosecuted and imprisoned for treason.