Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Wednesday, October 26, 2016
  • One President lashed out against an entire culture, following a premise of guilty by association, with tens of thousands of people killed or displaced; the other has focused on specific targets involving people engaged in activities designed to destroy the USA and our interests overseas. The similarities are obvious, and so are the differences when it comes to the outcome of both policies.

  • Robert P. Robertson

    When we consider political power conferences by the Republican/Tea Bags discussing and whooping it up on how to politically assassinate Democratic opponents, who’s more stained than whom? When we consider how terrorists use children and teenagers as suicide bombers, distractors to draw attention while they attack from behind, and how they cowardly run into civilian crowds to use the citizens as human shields while they continually fire upon US troops, who’s more stained than whom. these Republican/Tea Bags are hell bent on trying to discredit, smear, and disparage their president, they are keeping this drone thing alive. They have put Benghazi in their back pockets to use against hillary Clinton for 2016, so who is more stained than whom?

  • roguerunners

    So…Bush does it and it’s fine. Obama continues it (in a more controlled manner) and it’s NOT OK?????

  • CPAinNewYork

    The Muslims’ faith dictates that all observant Muslims must kill the non-Muslims. That pits them against the Christians, Jews, Buddhists, pagans, etc. in a life or death fight. Let’s all get together and eliminate the Muslims. Nobody will miss them.

    • sleepvark

      I hope you are only joking here. Even at that, it’s a very low form of the art, bordering on the inciting of hate crimes. To say something like this indicates an abysmal ignorance of the reality of these people’s beliefs. Such bigoted ignorance is unworthy of us.

      • CPAinNewYork

        What, deporting them out of the United States is a hate crime? What about the Muslims’ desire to kill us? That’s all right by you? It’s fools like you who want to “make nice” with these homicidal maniacs that encourages them. A good kick in these bastards groins would do the world a great deal of good.

        • sleepvark

          Yes CP, that would be a hate crime. And I am much more concerned about our home grown ignoramuses than I am about any Muslims anywhere in the world. I say that as someone who has been shot at, facing Arabs and Muslims in battle at various times and places. You have no idea who you’re talking to or even what you are talking about. You obviously have never had to face down a real enemy. A good thing too, since you would not be able to tell the difference. I did not spend a couple of decades getting shot at to defend your right to bigoted ignorance. My oath was to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Guess where you fit in.

          • CPAinNewYork

            Deportation is a legal procedure carried out by the civil authorities and isn’t a hate crime. In the early fifties, the United States outlawed the American Communist Party because it openly advocated the violent overthrow of the United States government. The Muslim religion advocates the murder of anyone who isn’t a Muslim. I believe that Congress should outlaw the Muslim religion as a clear and present danger to the United States, the punishment for which should be deportation.

            I don’t believe that you spent any time getting shot at. If you think that the Muslims of the world don’t constitute a clear and present danger to the United States, then you must not be familiar with any of the events of September 11, 2001. What does it take to penetrate your thick head? They killed 3,000 people by crashing captured planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. And you don’t think that people like that are a danger?

            They are fanatical dingbats and we have a right to defend ourselves, a position with which you evidently disagree. My position isn’t one of bigoted ignorance. it’s based on the clear evidence from September 11, 2001. These are events that actually happened. They’re not some remote theoretical threat.

          • sleepvark

            My, what a rich field of endeavor. Where should I start.
            Fear. Your every word reeks of it. Given that the goal of the 9-11 terrorists was to instill fear and terror into the hearts and minds of the American people, it would seem that they have succeeded. At least in your case.
            Your fear would have you so casually dispose of the US Constitution and the bill of rights.
            Fear makes you stupid, a fact that I have observed in the boxing ring and in battle. Yours is one of the worst cases I’ve encountered so far.
            Joe McCarthy would be so proud of you. Deporting communists? Like the case of Qian Xuesen perhaps? You know, the greatest mind in American rocket science ever, the only man qualified to interrogate Werner Von Braun when he was brought over. The one who after the FBI and INS so stupidly conspired to get him deported back to China, was responsible for creating their rocket and nuclear weapons program. If you are literate enough to be able to read an actual book, I would refer you to Thread of the Silkworm, though that’s most likely casting pearls before swine.
            I have faced the guns and missiles of both the communist and muslim world. I’ll give you a hint. They missed.
            I don’t fear them. They are not a threat to me or my way of life. You and your ideas however, represent a much greater threat to America and her institutions than those oh so scary folks could ever dream of becoming.
            But just for argument’s sake, let’s go with what you propose. Let’s deport all the, as you say, fanatical dingbats we can find because we have a right to defend ourselves. That means we can deport you. Were that to happen, I would vigorously support it.

          • CPAinNewYork

            Yes, I fear fanatical people who have demonstrated by their actions that they’re willing to commit murder at the cost of their own lives. I call that a rational fear.

            I don’t know what your point is. You claim to have no fear and spout a lot of bravado about your past exploits. I think that you’re blowing smoke, but I don’t care, because you seem to be totally irresponsible. Your words remind me of George Bush’s reaction when reminded of the Muslims’ penchant for violence. Remember what he said? He said “Bring ’em on.”

            This from a guy who intentionally missed his Air Force physical so that he wouldn’t have to report to Viet Nam for duty. A brave man when he didn’t have to put his life on the line.

            You claim to have observed fear in the boxing ring and in battle. Very impressive, but to me it doesn’t cut any ice whether it’s true or not.

            True leadership means clearly assessing risk and reacting to it in a rational way. Your irrational and insulting remarks smack of a deluded individual who couldn’t make a rational decision if his life depended on it. You may be brave, but your bravery, if it’s true, is the kind that leads to reckless acts that unnecessarily endanger lives. You remind me of George Custer, who was brave….and dead at an early age.

          • sleepvark

            Well, finally a few points I agree with.
            Yes, the little shrub was a total wuss. He should be forced to wear a bra and panties for the rest of his worthless life.
            And Custer was indeed an arrogant blowhard who could not understand the nature of the warnings he was getting from his very capable scouts. His stupidity led directly to his demise.
            At last you put your concerns onto certain individuals. But your fears are still irrational. I do not respect your fear.
            I insult you because you make it so easy and enjoyable. Your condemnation of over a billion people because of religion is what puts you into my sights.
            If you knew the least thing about Islam, your would know that the 9-11 perpetrators are all roasting in hell according to their own professed beliefs.
            There is precious little difference between Christianity and Islam. What is considered evil in one is just as bad in the other. The differences are mostly stylistic.
            Get some education and get a life.

          • CPAinNewYork

            Yes, we do agree on some minor points. One is that you’re an insulting clod with a paucity of rational arguments.

            The 9/11 perpetrators are all roasting in hell? How do you know? You’re a religious blowhard who can’t address the central issue, namely that the Muslims are a threat to the United States. There isn’t “…precious little difference between Christianity and Islam.” There is a world of difference.

            Christians aren’t charged with killing all who don’t embrace Christianity, as the present day Muslims are. You may consider that a minor point, but I assure you that rational people don’t. Rational people, once confronted with a threat, prepare their defenses. Irrational buffoons like you don’t do that. Instead, they frequently sublimate their fears by pretending that the threat doesn’t exist or is exaggerated. It makes them feel good. Do you feel good thinking that the Muslims are like Christians?

            Assuming that you’re serious in your simplistic beliefs, it is difficult for me to understand you. What I do understand is that you’re dangerous, because you might convince others of your warped point of view. If we let our guard down, as we did in the World Trade Center disaster, we’ll suffer yet another calamity. Remember, we had a warning in 1993, when a bunch of Muslim jihadis set off that huge car bomb in the underground parking garage of the World Trade Center. We let our guard down. Those charged with our safety like the FBI and the CIA let their guard down and 3,000 innocent people died for it.

            Is that what you’re advocating, that the “vast majority” of Muslims are nice people who wouldn’t hurt us, so we should tolerate them? I think that you are. That’s why I think that you’re dangerous. Hopefully, you’re mental aberrations are well known to the people around you, but it’s impossible to tell.

            So, do you see from where I’m coming? Do you now understand what “rational fear” is? I hope so, but I am skeptical. Your intemperate language indicates a troubled mind. I hope that someone is keeping a close watch on you.

          • Don’t waste time trying to reason with idiots like CP. I, for one, have worked with Muslims in the past, and found them to be good, hard working people.

            CP obviously listens to the morons on Faux Snooze, along with all the hot air bags on “Conservative” talk radio.

            You will never convince him that most Muslims just want to live in peace and do not want to kill us. He is too far gone.

          • CPAinNewYork

            I don’t watch Fox News, but I do consider events like the WTC disasters (Yes, there were two.), the USS Cole, the bombing of the nightclubs in Indonesia, India and Germany. Those are actual incidents, not theoretical wish lists like your desire to believe that Muslims are like Christians, Jews, Buddhists and other civilized religions.

            They are not. They adhere to a vicious religion that demands they kill anyone who isn’t a Muslim. Fools like you see the world in simplistic terms. You believe that everyone is our friend and that everyone is good.

          • sleepvark, i like CPAin NewYork. He’s really bright and I think he’s putting on. But, man, I gotta tell you, that was a good one! LMFAO!

    • ralphkr

      Well, CPA, the Christians tried to kill all Mohammedans (that is what Christians called Muslims then) a few hundred years ago and only succeeded in making enemies of a large segment of the world. An interesting comparison of the humanity shown by the two sides is demonstrated by the fact that the Crusaders would allow captured Muslims to accept Christianity and be baptized before executing them while the Muslims would allow the Christians to convert and go to work in various positions (in one case an ex-Christian became the second in command of an important department of the Muslim Empire which was rather surprising considering how much more advanced in the sciences and finances the Muslims were than the Christian nations in the 13th Century)

      • CPAinNewYork

        You’re absolutely right ralphkr, but so what? That was then, this is now.

        While it’s true that Richard I was sadly lacking in ethics and Saladin was far superior to him in that respect, we cannot sit idly by while the Muslims try to exact revenge for what happened seven hundred years ago.

        That is suicide. If you want to engage in that on your own, then leave me out. I prefer to recognize the here and now and to take the appropriate protective action, including declaring the Muslim religion illegal in America and expelling all Muslims who do not renounce their religion.

        • ralphkr

          OK, CPA, I take it that you have never read the Christian Bible in any of its various permutations. I do remember that the Bible I studied called for getting rid of all who did not worship the same as a believer (Jews were the only believers at the time that was written) as well as promoting slavery and the fact that women were chattel ranking slightly higher (but not much higher) than livestock but I note that very few strictly follow biblical teachings although in the late 1940s I recall our pastor calling for us to arm ourselves to resist the Catholic onslaught after they had expanded their armory (they had purchased new ceremonial swords). All you have to do is look and you shall find many passages in our Bible just as bloody as those in the Koran and if you look at some of the more extreme Christians you shall find groups that want to do away with everybody who is not a member of their particular sect (at the very least they do damn them to eternity in hell).

          • CPAinNewYork

            My having read the Bible is irrelevant to what this discussion is about. What happened seven hundred years ago and what’s in the Bible offer no guidance as to what we should do to protect ourselves from the Muslim nutcases that are in this country and therefore pose a threat to us.

            My solution: kick them out, regardless of whether they were born here or someplace else.

          • ralphkr

            OK, CPA, now that you have discarded the Constitution of the United States and the Bible in your effort to justify deporting a religious sect who else should we send packing…Mormons? Baptists?

          • CPAinNewYork

            I haven’t discarded either the Constitution or the Bible. Passing a law similar to the anti-Communist act of 1954 doesn’t violate the Constitution, unless the common law principle of self-defense is unconstitutional. The Bible doesn’t give much if any guidance on deportation, unless you construe the Exodus as describing the expulsion of the Jews from Egypt instead of their escape, so that’s an illogical reference on your part.

          • ralphkr

            So you have not discarded either our Constitution or the Bible?? Yet you state that the Bible is irrelevant and ignore the First Amendment. The anti-Communist act of 1954 did violate the First Amendment just as deporting people for their religion also violates the First Amendment.

            For your education (since you are obviously unfamiliar with the concept) the First Amendment states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

            The Anti-Communist Act of 1954 obviously abridged freedom of speech and deporting a religious group not only abridges their freedom of speech but abridges their right to worship as well as the right of both groups to peaceably assemble.

          • CPAinNewYork

            The Supreme court approved the Anti-Communist Act of 1954, so by definition it didn’t violate the Constitution. Perhaps the fact that the Communist Party advocated the violent overthrow of the United States had something to do with the Court’s thinking.

            Parts of the Bible were written as much as 2000 years ago and doesn’t advocate having to tolerate the homicidal proclivities of a disaffected religious minority.

            You know little about the Constitution and have a distorted view of the Bible because you view both as documents that aren’t subject to change or interpretation.

          • ralphkr

            Actually, the Bible advocates smiting all who disagree with the Bible (I read that as “Kill them all”) and I am positive that it is the “Ten Commandments” and not the “Ten Suggestions” the way the majority interpret it now. By the way, I read a number of Conservative sites and I see a lot of authors there advocating the violent overthrow of the US government so does that mean that Conservatives should be deported or jailed?

          • CPAinNewYork

            It means that they should be prosecuted and if found guilty, jailed. If they do it during wartime, they could be prosecuted for treason and executed.

            It appears that we agree on the Bible’s not prohibiting one from defending oneself.

            By the way, let me tell you my take on the Bible:

            It was written by men, not God and is very biased. It’s not considered by historians to be an accurate portrayal of history. The Old Testament is biased toward the Jewish/Hebrew point of view. The New Testament is biased toward the Christian point of view.

          • ralphkr

            I fear that I too believe the Bible was written by men (that alone damns me to Hell) and I also note that what is written in the various translations changes according to whomever was paying for the translations.

            I must admit, CPA, that in the past I have erred and voted for a Republican from time to time BUT the current uber-conservatives have convinced me to never vote for a Republican no matter how good I think he is. If you think we have far right nut jobs here you should try posting on places like WND. It is absolutely amazing how many thumbs down I can acquire in just a few minutes. My record was 15 negatives in less than a minute on a post where I corrected someone about historical dates and happenings.

            Good Democrats think than I am conservative and good Republicans think that I am liberal. Of course, the solid Republican state where I grew up considered me a flaming Commie…they also considered Goldwater a pinko. Everyone’s problem is that I believe that I have the right to be armed (the star I used wear reinforced that belief), a woman has the right to choose birth control or abortion, I believe in the death penalty (the only person I have ever heard of committing a crime after being executed was Jesus Christ), I believe that children have a right to food and to health care (children consistently starved tend to have low I.Q.s {future Republican voters}), and the list goes on with me being for altogether too many Conservative and too many Liberal touchstones.

          • CPAinNewYork

            Your second paragraph: Never say never. You must evaluate each politician on his or her own merits and vote for the one that offers you the most benefit or, conversely, the least harm.

            Remember, politicians are seldom good or bad. They do whatever they have to do to get re-elected.

          • ralphkr

            Sorry, CPA, but as long as the uber-crazy wingnuts control the Republican Party it is my duty to vote against EVERY Republican. Haven’t you notice how much harm local Republican control has done to our national government as well as to their own constituents? By properly aligning districts they were able to retain control of the House and there is a good chance that they shall regain the Senate since more Democrats are up for election (many from strong Republican districts) than Republican Senators and much few people vote in the off years (unfortunately, the much fewer can be translated as Democratic voter).

  • Remember the first drone under president Bush killed a enemy of another nation, not a enemy of the United States, and gave authority to the FBI to oversea the drones.

  • adriancrutch

    It’s all about WEALTH! Plain-an-Simple! And the politicians that enable the corporate sociopaths to destroy the earth for the privelege! Thanks Obama!

  • ObozoMustGo

    And now…. The REAL Cartoon Of The Day!

    [click image to enlarge]

    Have a nice day!

    Sen. Barack Obama’s Floor Speech, March 20, 2006 — “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. …
    Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that “the buck stops here.” Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.”

    • The real cartoon of the day is you, Bozo. What, you’re running out of cliche, banal quotes and bullshit Republican/Tea Bag tripe to recycle this garbage from six months ago? Bozo, you’re such a clown, but you’re tons of fun too!