Another violation of Posse Comitatus

[finity]

Prior to Iraq, would you please name every Republican president that led this country to war?

Where exactly did I say that only Republicans start wars? I didn't even say all wars were useless.

It could be argued that Republicans started recent useless wars, though.

 

[BloodEclipse]

Where exactly did I say that only Republicans start wars? I didn't even say all wars were useless.

It could be argued that Republicans started recent useless wars, though.

That would depend on YOUR definition of useless.

 

[finity]

If it was voluntary, I have no problem with it. Instead, until two days ago, it was written as required on Change.org. Two days ago it was changed to suggest that it be done.

I think I also said that I wasn't real convinced that basic training should be mandatory. But I also think that people today could use some formal training in arms (a la the militia of old) not to mention the discipline that they would get.

The "required" wording was changed a long time ago on Obama's official web page.

If the right, even the fringe right, wasn't pushing the questioning on this whole issue, I feel that it would not have been changed. Wasn't that what "O" wanted? To keep touch with the people through the website and change his policy according to feedback on the website? "O's" team felt the heat and melted accordingly.

So now that Obama has changed his policy on this subject to coincide with the "will of the people" then he is "melting". I thought that's what our elected officials were supposed to do. Kind of like what you mentioned later in your post.

And to go the other way with it, you might be saying that "O" is trying to draw policy or procedure from Israel to incorporate into his policy?

No I'm not saying that. I just used it as an example of the hypocrisy of the right. If any right-wing politician in the last administration would have suggested the same thing most people on the right would have applauded it as gun-friendly & "strong on defense". Because it came from the Obama camp now its subverting the Constitution.

Not subversive to me because I want other citizens to be able to effectively defend themself and their property from any government or government entity that intends them harm or that tries to limit/remove their rights. Also, there is nothing in print nor have I heard any verbalization (slips - Freudian or mis-speaking) that have given me concern that their goal is other than as stated.

Me too & me neither, just extending the logic you're using in arguing against basic training.

To "O", non-gun owners and, IMO, liberals in general - Yes.

What about liberal gun-owners? There sure seems to be a lot of those, especially recently.

I don't put it past "O" to try something like that because, IMO, he thinks he has enough popularity to push anything through into law in the next four years, regardless of the Constitution.

Like what? A "nazi-esque brown shirt" style force? So I guess he also had enough popularity to pass another AWB even though Pelosi & Reid both shot that idea down (at least for now).

The FED is supposed to oversee commerce and provide national defense outside the nation, not inside. I think that the inside-the-nation defense is a responsibility of the individual states.

You say that right after you say you were "on aircraft carriers" so I assume you were in the Navy. Don't you remember your oath, "enemies, both foreign & domestic". If that doesn't mean that the federal government has the duty to provide national defense for enemies inside the nation then please explain what it does mean.

I don't wear a tinfoil hat.

You do if you think Obama is going to build a personal security force to kick in peoples doors to undermine Constitutional freedom based on the little evidence you have presented so far.

If you wish to be a "sheep" and not keep an eye on our government to raise the alarm when there is wrong-doing, that is fine. I only ask that you be honest and admit to being a sheep.

Oh, puleeze. I don't think that in any post in any thread that I have been involved in have I said or implied that I won't keep an eye on our government. I think if nothing else good came out of the last eight years is that it finally got people to really watch the government. I don't like some of the things that our government is doing now either. I just try to put a little reality into the "sky is falling" tone to the majority of the threads here. That doesn't make me a "sheep" just not paranoid. At least I'm not a "chicken little" or "the boy who cried wolf".

 

[Joe Williams]

That would depend on YOUR definition of useless.

Or "started." Since I don't believe finally taking the fight to an enemy that has been attacking us at home and abroad for more than a decade actually consists of "starting" a war. But the left, in their rabid support of the enemy waging war against us for many years, doesn't consider those attacks on America bad things. The bad thing is a President who actually fulfills his oath to defend this nation.

 

[ihateiraq]

Or "started." Since I don't believe finally taking the fight to an enemy that has been attacking us at home and abroad for more than a decade actually consists of "starting" a war. But the left, in their rabid support of the enemy waging war against us for many years, doesn't consider those attacks on America bad things. The bad thing is a President who actually fulfills his oath to defend this nation.

the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were saudi, and none of them were iraqi or afghani. most of the combatants in iraq arent even iraqi. odds are, bin laden left afghanistan a long time ago. so im not sure who the enemey were taking the fight to is. im also pretty certain that its unfair to say that just because someone is a democrat they support the enemy and dont consider american fatalities a bad thing.

 

[BloodEclipse]

the majority of the 9/11 hijackers were saudi, and none of them were iraqi or afghani. most of the combatants in iraq arent even iraqi. odds are, bin laden left afghanistan a long time ago. so im not sure who the enemey were taking the fight to is. im also pretty certain that its unfair to say that just because someone is a democrat they support the enemy and dont consider american fatalities a bad thing.

But have you forgotten that they continued to act against our aircraft in addition to violate terms of the cease fire from the first Gulf War? In essence we didn't go to war with Iraq after 911, we merely resumed hostilities because Saddam violated the cease fire.

 

[hornadylnl]

It's a fact that the poor are overly represented in the armed forces. Rich peoples kids go to college on mommy & daddy's dime. The poor don't have that luxury. Deny it all you want but it doesn't make it false.

More class warfare, that's all I heard. Finity, if you have the secret to how hating on the rich puts money into your pocket, please share it with us so we can all get our fair share. Oh, wait, we already know what it is. Wealth redistribution.

I guess because my parents were bringing in $100k a year when I graduated high school, I'm a rich kid with a silver spoon in my mouth. They never said one word to me that implied they'd pay a dime for me to go to school. I joined the (gasp) Army to get the college fund.

I served with a guy who was a self made millionaire in the Army. His dad was a retired one star general with a large stake in a hotel chain. He could have ran to his rich daddy to bail him out but he went into the army for student loan repayment.

I guess we need affirmative action for the military now. Only so many poor people are allowed. I guess they don't need that job so they can go back to gang banging or whatever else it was that wasn't working.

 

[ihateiraq]

More class warfare, that's all I heard. Finity, if you have the secret to how hating on the rich puts money into your pocket, please share it with us so we can all get our fair share. Oh, wait, we already know what it is. Wealth redistribution.

I guess because my parents were bringing in $100k a year when I graduated high school, I'm a rich kid with a silver spoon in my mouth. They never said one word to me that implied they'd pay a dime for me to go to school. I joined the (gasp) Army to get the college fund.

I served with a guy who was a self made millionaire in the Army. His dad was a retired one star general with a large stake in a hotel chain. He could have ran to his rich daddy to bail him out but he went into the army for student loan repayment.

I guess we need affirmative action for the military now. Only so many poor people are allowed. I guess they don't need that job so they can go back to gang banging or whatever else it was that wasn't working.

both of you are right. a lot of people join the military for a lack of anything better to do with their lives, as a lot of people simply do it out of a desire to serve. my folks were well enough off to pay for school and while my gpa was low, my sat scores were high enough to get me in. i decided to postpone college until after the military though. most of my family were marines, including my old man. he advised me against that route though, and i landed in the army. long story short, its up to the person to decide on whether or not they want to serve, but their economic background might nudge them down that road.

 

[Blue Tile Spook]

The "required" wording was changed a long time ago on Obama's official web page.

You are correct. I did not check the date on my reference material.

So now that Obama has changed his policy on this subject to coincide with the "will of the people" then he is "melting". I thought that's what our elected officials were supposed to do. Kind of like what you mentioned later in your post.

To change his policy based on a website is short-sighted, just as it would be if he based his public policies off of polls on CNN or FoxNews, hence my term "melting". As his website changes based on the few (compared to registered voters) respondents, what is left of "O" himself as it pertains to his core beliefs? He will begin, and some argue that he already has, to represent himself as what whomever screams loudest (repeatedly commenting or repeatedly voting on polls) on his website wants him to be, but people no longer can reference what "O" himself believes. I can respect a man that votes against his personal beliefs on an issue if he has a good reason to, but if his beliefs change because of the popularity on a website, I can't.

IMO, "we", the registered voters, did not know what "O" actually believed in before the election and I don't think that we do now after the election, either.

No I'm not saying that. I just used it as an example of the hypocrisy of the right. If any right-wing politician in the last administration would have suggested the same thing most people on the right would have applauded it as gun-friendly & "strong on defense". Because it came from the Obama camp now its subverting the Constitution.

I would suggest then that you do not know the right as well as you think you do.

What about liberal gun-owners? There sure seems to be a lot of those, especially recently.

My answer hasn't changed. Yes.

Like what? A "nazi-esque brown shirt" style force? So I guess he also had enough popularity to pass another AWB even though Pelosi & Reid both shot that idea down (at least for now).

Can you give me two examples of government-sponsored programs that have remained true to their promise when they were enacted? Every progam has become bloated beyond its original intent. It doesn't mean that it was evil, a la "nazi-esque brown shirt", but it becomes that way due to politicians, both REP and DEM subverting it to expand the government's reach into my personal life.

Yes, Pelosi and Reid could get an AWB passed with the number of DEM seats in Congress at the moment, but they will not do so because they know that it will cause them (DEM party) too much damage in the long run. A politician is a politician and they are trying to ensure that another job will be waiting for them when their current job comes to an end, as well as provide jobs for those other politicians of the same party around them. I think that it was Bush that made a public comment about "spending credit" or something to that effect.

You say that right after you say you were "on aircraft carriers" so I assume you were in the Navy. Don't you remember your oath, "enemies, both foreign & domestic". If that doesn't mean that the federal government has the duty to provide national defense for enemies inside the nation then please explain what it does mean.

Carl Vinson, Nimitz and Abraham Lincoln.

Yes, I remember my oath. I guess that I have to chalk this up to you and I having different opinions on the word "defending" in the oath.

I see it as the FED has the duty to provide logistics or training to any state with the need in times of crisis that ask for it. That enables the state(s) to defend against any enemy inside the U.S. without giving the FED the power to step in and take over. I refer to Reagan's quote, "We're from the government and we're here to help." I don't believe that they are.

You do if you think Obama is going to build a personal security force to kick in peoples doors to undermine Constitutional freedom based on the little evidence you have presented so far.

And I said that where?

Oh, puleeze. I don't think that in any post in any thread that I have been involved in have I said or implied that I won't keep an eye on our government. I think if nothing else good came out of the last eight years is that it finally got people to really watch the government. I don't like some of the things that our government is doing now either.

No, but you, IMO, sound like you have very little to worry about when it comes to this administration as a whole or when compared with previous administrations. I disagree with that. I do agree that it is good when people watch what our legislators are doing with our rights and our monies.

I was a cryptologist for the Navy. Our motto: "In God we trust, all others we monitor." Good words to live by.

I am not paranoid, but I don't take what the GOV says at face value. I watch for waste, fraud and abuse.

I just try to put a little reality into the "sky is falling" tone to the majority of the threads here. That doesn't make me a "sheep" just not paranoid. At least I'm not a "chicken little" or "the boy who cried wolf".

Where have I said the sky is falling?

I warn people about potential traps or pitfalls that I see coming up, just as I do with my wife and child if I see a gap in the pavement ahead of us when we are walking. It doesn't mean that they actually would fall ("sky is falling") into the gap, just that it could happen. I don't have to warn them if there is a simple crack because the potential danger is little, just like I don't see dire danger in the majority of threads here no matter the poster or material being referenced. Some threads I feel strongly enough about to pop up on and give my opinion.

IMO, the "reality" that you apply to the threads that you have responded to seems to center around disagreeing with most anyone that speaks harshly of "O" and/or his policies. You don't directly combat them, my hats off to you for your wordings.

The tone of your posts, IMO, is where I think that you show sheep-like qualities. I refer back to my words above about how I read your words about the current administration.

As I wrote on my positive rep to you a while back, I may not agree with you, but I support your right to say it.

 

[CarmelHP]

lol...are you serious? love him or hate him, obama isnt going to round anyone up and exterminate them. i hope you were using hyperbole and thats not what you really feel is going to happen. its that thought process that leads to ruby ridge-esque incidents. the government is not out to get you. just because people dont have the same views as you doesnt mean theyre trying to kill you.

Actually, they were out to get Randy Weaver at Ruby Ridge, they doggedly tried to get him to be a spy, so they set him up on a trumped up charge, and attacked his home and mowed down members of his family, in violation of their own rules of engagement. The feds settled their lawsuit with him, and he beat most of the federal charges because it was pretty clear they were out to get him. Weaver may not be a sterling individual, but they were out to get him.

 

[hornadylnl]

Hey Finity, since it is unfair that poor kids in Deteout don't have the same educational opportunities as your children, please pull your children out of their schools and put them in Detroit schools. After all, it isn't fair your kids have a better education.

 

[HICKMAN]

It's a fact that the poor are overly represented in the armed forces. Rich peoples kids go to college on mommy & daddy's dime. The poor don't have that luxury. Deny it all you want but it doesn't make it false.

Fair statement.... the Rich, regardless of party, have no clue about our day to day lives and get into whatever schools they want.

But poor doesn't equal Democrat in the military, since Democrats are a vast minority in the military. But that's how it is when it's voluntary and not mandatory.

So it seems that much of the lower class of your party end up in unions or on welfare and much of ours ends up in the military.

Pretty much sums up selfish vs selfless to me...

 

[Blue Tile Spook]

So it seems that much of the lower class of your party end up in unions or on welfare and much of ours ends up in the military.

Pretty much sums up selfish vs selfless to me...

Oh, snap!

 

[bft131]

This has got some legs under it now..Drudge is reporting that the Army and State of Alabama is investigating who sent these soldiers from Ft. Rucker to this town.....Naturally the White House is denying no knowledge of this and is blaming AIG.......LOL!!

 

[haldir]

BHO has a secret weapon if anyone gets too nosy. He just locks you in a room with Barney Frank for some weally intenthe quethoning.

 

[El Cazador]

CNSNews.com - Army Investigating How and Why Troops Were Sent Into Alabama Town After Murder Spree

CNS News reports on Investigation

 

[CulpeperMM]

This has got some legs under it now..Drudge is reporting that the Army and State of Alabama is investigating who sent these soldiers from Ft. Rucker to this town.....Naturally the White House is denying no knowledge of this and is blaming AIG.......LOL!!

glad to know that not everybody has their eyes closed. thanks for the update

 

[techres]

CNSNews.com - Army Investigating How and Why Troops Were Sent Into Alabama Town After Murder Spree

CNS News reports on Investigation

Glad to see it! I am surprised that this event is the one to grab media attention, but I am glad that it is happening none-the-less.

Good news. Thanks for catching it!

 

[printcraft]

BHO has a secret weapon if anyone gets too nosy. He just locks you in a room with Barney Frank for some weally intenthe quethoning.

Barney's truth squad.


YouTube - That's Despicable


YouTube - Elmer Fudd, 1950 & 2003

I could not find a Sylvester the cat. "Sufferin Sucotash"

 

[bft131]

Glenn Beck is doing a story about this on his show right now!!!