By @LOLGOP

WATCH: Paul Ryan And John McCain Attack President Obama Over Edward Snowden

June 25, 2013 4:04 pm Category: Memo Pad, Memo Share, Politics 119 Comments A+ / A-

Republicans decided that Tuesday morning was a good time to start attacking President Obama over the failed attempt to extradite former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, who recently left Hong Kong for Russia.

On CBS This Morning, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) said that the Snowden affair showed that the administration is becoming “more incompetent every day”:

Well, first of all, how is it that a 29-year-old contractor with one year at Booz Allen Hamilton can get this kind of security clearance, get this kind of access to this kind of intelligence, walk out with a thumb drive and give it to the world? I mean, how is it that our security clearances are so low that something like this can happen? That’s number one. Number two, once we’ve discovered that this person has stolen our secrets, has leaked them, you’d think we’d have a better job of following up with that in China and these other countries

But “incompetent” was too kind a word for Senator John McCain (R-AZ), who preferred “impotent”:

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The 2008 GOP nominee for president linked Snowden to an overwhelming pattern of “leading from behind,” adding that Russia’s unwillingness to cooperate indicated the president’s “reset” with the country had failed.

“It’s reminiscent of the days of the Cold War, when you hear a Russian spokesman saying that [Snowden’s] not in Russia when every shred of evidence indicates that he is,” McCain said on CNBC. “We’ve got to start dealing with Vladimir Putin in a realistic fashion for what he is. He’s an old KGB colonel apparatchik that dreams of the days of the Russian empire, and he continues to stick his thumb in our eye in a broad variety of ways.”

McCain then moved on to Syria, blasting the president for declaring that the use of chemical weapons was the “red line” and then only responding to their use by arming the rebels.

Noticably, neither Ryan nor McCain attacked Obama over the secret surveillance by the National Security Agency that Snowden recently exposed.

Screen Shot 2013-06-25 at 3.34.20 PM Screen Shot 2013-06-25 at 3.32.15 PM

WATCH: Paul Ryan And John McCain Attack President Obama Over Edward Snowden Reviewed by on . Republicans decided that Tuesday morning was a good time to start attacking President Obama over the failed attempt to extradite former NSA contractor Edward Sn Republicans decided that Tuesday morning was a good time to start attacking President Obama over the failed attempt to extradite former NSA contractor Edward Sn Rating:

More by @LOLGOP

Republicans Still Think You’re Stupid

What the Jonathan Gruber sideshow reveals about today's GOP.

Read more...

5 Things To Tell Your Republican Relatives At Thanksgiving Dinner

The definitive guide to dealing with your Fox-addled family members.

Read more...

Even ‘Moderate’ Republicans Are Bent On Sabotage

Scott Brown is a Veep character who thinks he’s on House of Cards. After becoming the first Republican elected in the Tea Party wave of 2010, his greatest accomplishment as a U.S. senator was helping banks rewrite Wall Street reform so it might protect “two financial institutions in Massachusetts from the Volcker Rule’s restrictions,” according to former

Read more...

Tags

Comments

  • Sand_Cat

    These two hypocrites don’t deserve the time required to even hear their BS.

    • John Pigg

      Agreed,

      Coincidently, remember a few years ago when Russia invaded Georgia and McCain wanted us to get involved and back Georgia? It’s time to retire Cold War era politics.

      • angelsinca

        “It’s time to retire Cold War era politics”

        Agreed, as sucessfully presented by Reagan.

        • Independent1

          A comment made by America’s worst president ever. The guy that has led us to the bring of economic disaster with his spending like a drunken sailor who spent more money in 8 years than the previous presidents over the previous 50 (tripled our deficit in 8 years), whose totally nonsense economic nonsense of trickle-down economics and tax cuts with budget cuts will spur the economy – inspired Bush Sr. and Jr. to follow his drunken sailor spending which resulted in adding another 12 trillion to our deficits in their 12 years in office. And whose signing of the flawed legislation that allows everyone who walks into an ER and claims their having an emergency to get healthcare they can’t pay for which has made America’s healthcare system the most expensive in the world: And whose Union Busting has enspired every CEO and Entreprenur to treat their employees like slaves – dishing out as few benefits as possible; recinding their promises to provide pensions and other retirement benefits that have helped channel virtually all the monies in the country to the top 1 and 2 percenters. Yes, that Reagan – the destroyer of the American Dream!!!!

          • angelsinca

            Why are you unable to look at the PRESENT debt contribution by the PRESENT source? Are you physically or just pathologically incapable of admitting Obama’s $12-15T contribution to nat’l debt thru the end of his term, without blaming the GOP? The truth will set you free.

          • Independent1

            I apologize for the snarky remark about the rock, but it’s comments like you just made – that Obama’s is responsible for adding $12-15T to the nat’l debt that prompt remarks like that.
            Technically, based on legislation that Obama has signed, he can only be charged with adding about ONE TRILLION to the national debt – and that was him approving the $889 billion of stimulous monies back in Feb 2009 which the GOP blocked Congress from approving – Obama did it with presidential authority. And the vast majority of economists have stated that it was that stimulus action along with the auto bailout (which Obama again did on his own because Congress blocked it), are what kept America from falling into the GOP’s second created depression.

            I have no clue where you are coming up with Obama adding $12-15 trillion to our debt. Let me rehash how our 16.8 trillion in debt came about. When Reagan took over from Carter (who is the only president by the way since before the Big Depression to reduce our debt below 50% of GDP, and Carter reduced it to about 35%) America’s debt was 800 billion. Over 8 years Reagan virtually tripled our debt to 2.3 trillion. Bush Sr. inherited the 2.3 trillion and almost doubled it over 4 years to 4.3 trillion. Clinton effectlively kept spending flat, really not adding to the deficit, but because of interest, it grew to 4.9 trillion. Over the next 8 years, Bush jr. more t han doubled the debt from 4.9 trillion to 10.6 trillion – but when he left office he also passed to Obama his last budget (the 10/1/08 to 9/30/09 budget) that included 1.6 trillion in deficit spending (which did not include the 889 billion stimulus money that Obama pushed for in Feb 2009).

            So straight away, Bush had taken a 4.9 trillion debt and turned it into 12.2 trillion with his last budget. But in addition
            to the disasterous budget he left Obama with an economic disaster that far exceeded the disaster that FDR inherited from Herbert Hoover – the 2008 Great Recession, didn’t turn into a depression ONLY BECAUSE of the economic actions of Barak Obama. But the economy with 14 million lost jobs, thousands of companies going belly up, could not be turned around on a dime, so at least 2-3 trillion of the deficit increase during Obama’s term are BUSH’S RESPONSIBILITY!!! )(I haven’t even talked about the vast UNFUNDED legislation that Bush and his rubber stamp congress passed during his disasterous 8 years in office – like two unfunded wars, two unfunded tax cuts, like an unfunded drug benefit giveaway to the drug industry, like a number of unfunded mandates to the states like the dsasterous No Child Left Behind obination.

            And one more fact – Obama has REDUCED deficit spending faster over the past 4 plus years than any president since Truman reduced spending after WWII. He’s actually cut Bush’s disasterous 1.6 trillion last budget to what the CBO has projected for this year which will be under 700 billion. He’s basically kept his promise of cutting deficit spending IN HALF during his 1st term AND OBAMA IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ADDING MULTIPLE TRILLIONS TO OUR DEBT!!!!!!!!

          • angelsinca

            As predicted, there is zero repsonsibility to accept the CURRENT debt. It will be $20-25T by the time the white house is returned back to the people. Thanbks but was already aware of the history of the debt, inculuding the propagandized version you present. You missed the other $800 billion printing free-for-all ordeerred of the fed by the WH. OOps goes there’s another $100 for a vacation.

            Handing out compliments for reduced defecit spending is like being sympathetic to the Boston Bomber because he didn’t kill more people.

          • angelsinca

            “I apologize for the snarky remark about the rock, but it’s comments like you just made…that prompt remarks like that”

            Why even bother with a non-apology that continues to blame others for your own words? Just because the president can’t accept reponsibility doesn’t mean it’s an acceptable practice.

          • angelsinca

            Speaking of uniuon busting, a strike was approved for the Bay Area Rapid Transit workers, again. This is an annual occurence and always results in higher fares for those that can barely afford the old fares. This time, the BART is offering one percent pay hike per year for the next five. The union is demanding 23%. All while the aging fleet is concerned about having to trun away riders due ridership growth (due to fuel prices, rising bridge tolls, and the general condition of vehicles for the avergae low income rider. Maybe new workers could find a way to get by on the average union wage of $114K/year, and the fares lowered back to where they were before the union went wage-crazy with the pooor’s money. Bust them too..

      • tax payer

        What? The United State didn’t help our Poor Georgia State?

  • charleo1

    I started to say, I never agree with Paul Ryan on anything. But, there are exceptions

    • Russell Byrd

      I would like to believe that Ryan is reasonable in his criticism, but I cannot help but wonder if this is just another attempt to discredit Obama and his administration. Check Ryan out carefully, over the last few years he has hit the top of the most corrupt in Congress. As well, some of his positions turned 180 when the Repub Bush went out and the Democrat Obama came in. I think McCain has a lot of principle most of the time. It is just I can never figure out what that principle is supposed to be.

      • marysolvel

        Bitterness, envy, can’t stand a black guy in the white house, looser…..

        • angelsinca

          “can’t stand a black guy in the white house”
          Not really, they just can’t stand Obama in the white house.

          • DurdyDawg

            You know what? Your right and I’m not fooled either because I know had Hillary become president she too would be going through this same bull shit.. BUT that Obama happened to have also been a black man merely enraged them that much more.

          • angelsinca

            “Obama happened to have also been a black man merely enraged them thst much more.”

            Please prove this claim as it applies to everyone you accuse of being ‘enraged’. You can’t. But at least you have the super power of being able to predict what might have happened, never did and likely never will. The race card stopped trending about the same time the blame began, 4½ years ago.

          • tax payer

            I thought he was half and half.

          • angelsinca

            I never pay attention to the racial makeup, except as the speaking cadence changes whenever the audience is mostly black.

          • DurdyDawg

            Don’t worry tax payer, it’s idiots like that who believe they are the final answer. Here I was saying had Hillery become president (which she almost did) and the way pubs are treating her today it’s only obvious they would be calling both her and the first gentleman how much of a communist they are yet here she says , “Nuh Uh!” How can you assume that since she never made it” Simple.. your a contrary. You and your ilk are the only block heads who’ve spewed hatred and bigotry, NOW you turn around and say it was us all this time.. Please, find another forum that will swallow your BS.

          • tax payer

            Obama has already submitted an application to be the doorman at the White House, when he leaves office, so he can advice the new President on how to stick it to the Americans of this country. Say, you foot is better looking than your face, so put a bag over your face iunless you think it’s Halloween.

      • charleo1

        Of course, it’s an attempt to discredit Obama. One of the major
        reasons the GOP has not contributed a single positive thing to
        the Country since Obama was elected. Is they spend 100% of
        their time, looking for yet another way to object, oppose, and
        obstruct. But, my point was, we must investigate. When it
        happens, a person of Snowden’s clearly deficient education,
        and low moral character, is able to do what Snowden has done.
        I think, yes, by all means. Let’s find out how this happened. And prevent to a much more certain degree, it doesn’t happen again.
        That perhaps contracting out this kind of work, is not something
        we ought to be doing.

        • angelsinca

          I agree with you wholeheartedly, except for the unecessary discrediting of the entire GOP because of McCain and Ryan’s malfeasance toward Obama. The positive contributions by the GOP are indeed there, but you have to look hard and through the eyes of the conservatiive.

          • DurdyDawg

            But the fact of it is, those Goppers who are creating this insanity (and there are many more than just these two nose bleeds) expect ALL Goppers to follow their lead else join ranks with the traitors like christi who decided that we’re all human beings and should respect everybody regardless of party affiliation.. If you are in the same class as Christi who is still a staunch Republican but refuses to play political hate games, then your not a modern Pub and we thank you for it but please, try not to defend those who refuse to live by moralistic standards.

          • angelsinca

            “please, try not to defend those who refuse to live by moralistic standards”

            Please provide examples where 1) ‘moralistic (sic) standards’ are being’refused’ and, 2) where those mystery shadows have been ‘defended’.

          • Independent1

            Coud you please illucidate for us just ONE positive contribution the GOP has made over the past 4 plus years and specify how it has benefitted the country. I’d really appreciate hearing this because I can’t think of one single thing the GOP has done to truely help this country in the past 30.

          • angelsinca

            Too easy. No, I won’t, not for you. Please allow me to explain. I am still trying to understand your ad hominem personal attack, “You’re about as clueless as rock – Oh! but you are a dumb rock!!”. Unprovoked, yet immature and silly. This lame-ass insult is enough motivation to disregard your request. But, please allow me to offer another reason not to comply,

            2) Having followed your posts, and usually enjoying the sometimes-independent perspectives, you have an anti-conservative way of looking at things that won’t allow you to believe any example of Republican excellence presented.

            Please elucidate for us where you have spoken positively of Republicans, our orthographically challenged commenter.

          • Independent1

            I noticed you figured out a way not to try and illucidate a GOP accomplishment BECAUSE THERE ARE NONE!!!

            And I have credited Eisenhower in numerous posts on his actions to push for the interstate highway system during his 2 terms; and I’ve often praised Teddy Roosevelt for all he did for America. But I AM AT A TOTAL LOSS TO COME UP WITH ANYTHING THAT ANY OTHER GOP PRESIDENT HAS DONE – BECAUSE THERE ISN’T ANYTHING!!!!!! Even Reagan was a disaster!!!!! The GOP can love him all they want BUT HE WAS A DISASTER AS A PRESIDENT!!! THE WORST EVER!!!!!!! What do you expect for an ACTOR??????? That’s all he was – AN ACTOR!!!!!
            He should have stayed doing that instead of destroying America!!!!!!!!!

          • angelsinca

            I noticed you couldn’t accept the two valid reasons for not doing your homework for you, just as you can’t be bothered correcting your own spelling.

            Trash-talking Reagan doesn’t raise my ire. It only reinforces what is already known; a complete disdain for the GOP. Nevermind the DNC’s complete disdain for the people, where it pretends to care for the little guy yet its policies make life more difficult for the masses. Thanks for the tax increases, the added debt, the domestic surveillance, the IRS harrassment, the impish blaming for the lack of real accomplishment that actually helps everyone, not just select groups and districts.

            But then, a democrat wouldn’t be caught dead helping a republican, even of they do comprise HALF the population. And of course Harry R. couldn’t resist to show his true colors by adding $100 MILLION in tourism dollars to the senate’s immigration bill. No honor.

    • Dana Es

      My husband and I discussed the need for more safeguards — no outside contractors in such sensitive work or, if it’s absolutely necessary, the outside business takes on complete responsibility for the actions of their employs and is contracted to clean up any messes made by anyone working for them, even if it means getting on a plane and kidnapping their guilty worker in Russia. No matter whom officially employs the people engaged in NSA work, each worker should have to take a lie detector and a personality test and have a thorough background check of themselves and close family members and associates before he or she can be hired. Once hired each person should have an individual code that can be traced and that would be required to do anything. No laptops, thumb drives, or any kind of recording device should be allowed to leave the premises. All outside communications in any form could and should be monitored. Special procedures should be in place for particularly sensitive materials or actions — maybe codes that are frequently changed, required involvement of more than one person. It should be thoroughly understood that there will be severe penalties for anyone who breaks the rules and the penalties should happen. Because of the importance of keeping certain things secret, strictness matters A LOT

      • charleo1

        I wholeheartedly agree with you both!

      • angelsinca

        Immediately after 9/11, all eyes on government documents required at least a secret clearance. My career abrubtly ended then because, with a non-citizen spouse, I was suddenly unqualified to work on govenrment programs for a prime contractor. If Snowden actually breached security as claimed, the standards for a clearance have relaxed and need to be revisited. This will surely end many more careers.

        • Independent1

          Actually, the agency that approved Snowden’s clearance is now being investigated with respect to its competency in providing the background checks it needed to approve the clearance.

          • angelsinca

            Thanks for the update. I’ve been in the field the past 2 days with no news. Working outdoors in the heat makes a person fatigued, more so than ‘rock dumb’.

      • WhutHeSaid

        I find it rather curious that you so ferociously defend the government’s sensitive information but view individual citizens’ privacy rights as no big deal. Would a totalitarian state be more to your liking, or do you simply find those things that are important to you to keep private as the only ones that really count?

    • angelsinca

      We still don’t (and may never) know what information Snowden had access to or might have taken with him on his dubious sojourn to Hong Kong and Russia The Chinese now have his FOUR (??!) computers and the KGB has Snowden. How can anyone so dumb make $200k as a contractor to steal and THEN cry foul? Unless, he was blackmailed into espionage or he was recruited for it. Either way, we don’t know. Waiting for the screenplay (or at least an interview with the now ex GF).

  • option31

    It is far past time for McCain to either retire or voted out. Is their a country that exists he does not want to invade? Depending upon how you look at it since 01 we have spent – wasted $1.4 trillion to in excess of $4. trillion. This money was borrowed and will have to be paid back sooner or later. We;d have been far better off spending here on ANYTHING vs Iraq and Afghanistan. Iraq is already back to ground zero with civil/religious factions killing each other. Afghanistan – same deal. In the mean time our childrens future has been mortgaged. We have wasted so many American lives either through death or injuries that it should make us all wonder why and for what? The only group coming out on top is the military industrial complex and the politicians feel good.

    As far as Snowden, he exposed a Unconstitutional program so I fail to see how he is a traitor, Yes a traitor is some one who breaks trust, but those that broke the trust are those that supported an illegal unconstitutional program that violates the 4th Amendment. Snowden just exposed their illegal activity.

    The traitors are guy like McCain, Lindsay Graham and the rest of the crew that supports violating the 4th Amendment. These people are just upset that the people now know we are being ruled by tyrants.

    • charleo1

      I can agree with you on the wars. Especially Iraq. And it’s looking more
      and more like we should have limited the Afghan war to breaking up the
      the Al Qaeda training camps, and then, monitoring the situation, to ensure
      they don’t come back. However, the Afghan people living under the
      tyrannous Taliban, was, I believe a compelling factor for our going in. Americans fight extreme oppression. It’s our tradition. It’s what we do.
      As for Snowden, he is absolutely, a traitor. For any number of reasons.
      Not the least of which was his violating The Constitution. The Constitution
      allows very specific remedies for striking down laws that don’t pass
      Constitutional muster. A high school dropout, with far too much access
      to sensitive material, doesn’t get to decide such things. You’re claiming
      your 4th Amendment Rights have been violated. But, without knowing
      all the facts, your charge is not based on anything but your preexisting
      opinion of the Federal Government. And that doesn’t pass Constitutional
      muster, anymore than Snowden’s does. Now, if you are of the mind, your
      Government should not keep certain information, or any information,
      secret from the public. Or, you believe when it does, it must be because
      it is plotting aganist it’s own citizenry, that’s preposterous, and unfounded.
      As far as being, “ruled by tyrants.” Let me explain something to you.
      There are 7 billion people on this planet. And, the vast majority of them
      live under regimes that would consider what you’ve written in your
      comment on this public board, a violation of their law. And they don’t
      try to hide it. They let their people know in the strongest of terms. You
      say anything derogatory about the government, or the people who run
      it. You won’t need to speculate about tyranny. No Sir! It will show up
      at your door. And, they won’t violate your 4th Amendment Rights. They
      won’t violate any of your Rights. Because there, you have no Rights to
      violate in the first place.

      • Ford Truck

        You say “…the Afghan people living under the tyrannous Taliban, was, I believe a compelling factor for our going in. Americans fight extreme oppression. It’s our tradition.” How long are we responsible for fighting oppression in another country? American will eventually exit Afghanistan, and I predict that within 2 years, the Taliban will be back in charge, just as cruel and repressive as they were before 9/11, and just as willing to invest in terrorism! American cannot, and SHOULD NOT be responsible for Afghanistan, that is the job of the Afghan people .

        • charleo1

          I don’t disagree with your conclusions at all my friend.
          But, I do think Americans at learning of the barbaric
          practices of the Taliban. Especially their treatment of
          of girls, and women, played a part in garnering the
          public support for a much more ambitious mission,
          than simply eliminating, or going after Al Qaeda. It was
          an issue that pushed the buttons of both evangelicals,
          on the Right, and Progressive women, on the Left.
          Clinton’s successful intervention in Serbia only 3 years
          past, helped the politics. Plus, the Country was just
          really pissed off over 9/11. But American altruism, the
          notion that if we knew about oppression, it was our
          obligation to stop it, has played a role in every conflict
          we’ve ever been involved with, to a greater or lesser
          extent. There was, and most likely still is, the belief that
          the Almighty blessed America, and made us strong,
          because we fought on the side of righteousness.
          Therefore, it has always been the case, a President,
          urging military action, is always careful to establish the
          moral underpinnings for war. Even above national security.

          • highpckts

            Since when is it the US’s “duty” to foist our “morals” on any nation or country? These countries have been at war since forever! No amount of human loss of life or money will ever stop it! I believe it is up to the people of that country to bring about change! We are not the world’s policemen! We have neglected our own country too long and it is beginning to show! Where is the stopping point? How long does this country have to suffer because of our so called morals?

          • WhutHeSaid

            I agree with you. When we feel qualified to force our morals on other countries via violent force, we also give those countries justification to commit violence against us. Not only do we waste lives and treasure over pursuits with dubious rewards – we help feed a vicious cycle of violence.

          • WhutHeSaid

            That’s a nice pipe dream. Can you offer a brief description of the ‘righteous’ aspects of Vietnam, arming & training UBL and his Taliban fighters or even America’s own concentration camps? It seems to me that killing people in the name of ‘righteousness’ is a bit overrated. Folks generally dislike being killed, and often miss the righteous part of it.

          • charleo1

            Hey, I was only describing the phenomena. Not endorsing it.
            And we by no means invented it. Look at what the Spaniards
            did in their mission to convert the indigenous people to
            Catholicism. The idea of a manifest destiny, rolled over
            thousands of Native Americans. An episode in our past
            that included such heinous, and horrific acts of genocide,
            we continue to lie about the worst of it, even today. The
            Civil War, of course had a moral underpinning. Wilson,
            fighting mainly Christians in Europe. Choose to make the
            world safe for democracy. And fought the old aristocracy.
            The Godless Communist, and their nuclear powered goal
            to spread their evil empire, doctrine across the globe.
            And force Christians to renounce God, or be put to the
            sword. So we placed trip wires the world over, to stop
            the Communist advance. My point is, we do seem to have
            this proclivity towards foreign entanglements. But, now
            even as the NeoCons attempt to further involvements,
            and Police actions. America, after more than a decade of
            war, wants to come home. Rebuild our own Country.
            Bring down the debt, and take care of our own. And,
            I sincerely hope we do.

          • WhutHeSaid

            Whether we invented violent adventurism or not, we’ve certainly embraced it wholeheartedly in our short history. To me, the recent arguments over NSA snooping on American civilians and the apparent tendency to overuse drone attacks are part of the same cycle of violence and justification after the fact. It’s a slippery slope. Being the world’s bully (or the world’s savior, as some see it) has always eventually ended in the same way.

            I don’t know the answer to the problem, but certainly spending more than the rest of the world combined on defense (read: military expenditures) invites this type of adventurism. The military complex will always seek ways to test out their new toys and justify the purchase of more. We need to focus our resources inward for a few decades, but the fear-mongers have gotten too good at their trade: convincing Americans that there is an Al Qaeda suicide bomber behind every tree.

          • charleo1

            I think what you’re asking, for example. When can the gov’t
            help stimulate the economy, and put people back to work,
            by repairing, and modernizing long neglected infrastructure?
            Never, according to some. When does cutting Gov’t spending
            become a bad idea, because it would cost the struggling
            economy hundreds of thousands of jobs? When the cuts are
            to the military, of course! On the NSA, I’m not too concerned.
            Some are, and that’s a valid opinion. However, it has Congressional oversight, and the FISA Court. So, it’s not this
            clandestine operation, no one is aware of, Nor is it carried out
            in secret, without accountability. And, if they are only doing
            what they say they are. And, those members of Congress,
            both, Ds, and Rs, charged with overseeing the program, back them on this. I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt. And,
            it seems, those the most opposed to the program, have the
            opinion the government should level with, and inform the public of what they are doing at all times. And, assume if the Gov’t is hiding something, it must be a plot of some kind.
            So, they are hailing Snowden, as some kind of patriotic
            hero. That this 30 year old, high school dropout, decided
            all on his own, the Constitution was being violated. And if
            informing the public meant also informing terrorists which
            of their actions was the most likely to get them caught.
            Well, that’s a risk Mr. Snowden was willing to take.

          • angelsinca

            “Clinton’s successful intervention in Serbia only 3 years
            past, helped the politics.”

            Yeah, out of fear Clinton would order more bombers badged as NATO observers that might kill even more civilians. It seems Serbia-born terrorism against the US wasn’t too impaired by the sucessful politics.

          • charleo1

            You can characterize it any way you want. But, there was
            a genocide taking place, and we, not just Clinton, America
            stopped it. I guess it’s evident why so few Americans take
            any pride in their Country anymore. There is always some
            asshole, with a political ax to grind, finding fault with
            everything the last guy that had the job did. That’s how they
            did it in the old Soviet Union. Everything that didn’t work,
            they blamed it on the previous guy. Long live the King,
            until he dies, then screw him!

          • angelsinca

            “There is always some asshole, with a political ax to grind, finding fault with everything the last guy that had the job did”

            This is so very true, everytime we hear ‘Bush’.

      • Independent1

        Charle, maybe I missed something but wasn’t our purpose for starting the Afghan war caused by the Taliban shielding Osama bin Laden who had masterminded the 9/11 attacks and they were also providing al Qaeda with training grounds for their operations? And it’s my understanding that we’ve continued the war because our government has been concerned that if we leave the country before the Afghan government can actually defend itself against the Taliban, that the Taliban will revert to what they were doing before we went in – not only going back to surpressing the population but also opening the door for the creation of another al Qaeda or other terrorist training ground.

        I’m not certain how things have been going in Afghanistan recently, I see that the Taliban is causing problems again, but at one point about 6 months ago, a number of the war lords in the country had become fed up with the Taliban and were helping the American and Afghan troops actually drive the Taliban out of the country. Hopefully that hasn’t changed significantly over the past few months.

        • charleo1

          No, you’ve got it right. It didn’t take us more than one day
          to figure out who was behind the attacks. It was Al Qaeda,
          and they were in Afghanistan. Supplying some extra muscle
          to the Taliban when necessary, and running a training camp.
          Okay, all well and good. Bush ordered the Taliban to give up Bin Laden, and they refused. But the politics, of actually
          going in, and knocking down the existing government, were
          not good. The Democrats were giving a lot push back on
          the idea. Ironically it was Joe Biden, that held it was not necessary to take down the existing government to deal with Bin Laden. And, they reminded Bush, this was Afghanistan.
          You probably know, but we had a small contingent of special
          forces on the ground the next day. Bringing with them a lot
          of cash, to enlist the help of these tribal leaders that lived in
          or near in the Hindu Kush mountains. Bin Laden had also prepared for his escape. bribing some of the same guys that
          had also taken our money, and promised us they would help.
          Mean while, Bush is issuing ultimatums to the Taliban to
          turn over Bin Laden, or else. The facts were, they had no
          idea where Bin Laden was at this point. And the Taliban
          are a bunch of fundamentalist hard asses anyway. So, no one believed they wouldn’t have given him up, if they knew where he was. The NeoCons wanted to go in. Arguing the
          Taliban was no match militarily. And we could build bases
          on Pakistan’s door step. The truly dangerous actor in the
          region. And tip the balance of power away from Iran.
          Which was then, and continues to train, and supply arms
          to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Menacing Israel with rocket
          attacks. Who also joined with Assad’s forces just last month.
          Watch the Golan Heights. As the civil war in Syria threatens to spread. I digressed a bit. But, everything throughout that region, is tied to everything else. Now, it was about tis time,
          we started seeing these informational reports on the Taliban.
          Especially their treatment of girls, and women. The moral
          minders, that flog women in the streets for Islamic rule
          infractions. The woman that was beheaded at the soccer game. Why, they won’t even allow kite flying! And my
          opinion, this brought enough of the Left on board. If you
          want to motivate Progressive women, Don’t talk Geo-political
          strategy. Show them how their Sisters are being treated,
          by these Black Turbaned, male chauvinist pigs.

          • Independent1

            Thanks for the updates – I wasn’t aware of the Bush administration being so naive as to believe that the Taliban would turn over bin Laden for money. It’s been my feeling that Bush was so hellbent on attacking Iraq, that he purposely made only a halfhearted effort to run down bin Laden; and partly maybe, because bin Laden had given him something more that he could use to con Congress into giving him permission to go ahead with the attack.

            The sad part, is that what I’ve been reading lately isn’t very optomistic about the Afghan government being able to prevent the Taliban taking over the country when we leave; which will, as you pointed out with some examples, be devastating to the well being especially of Afghan women: it’s a sad picture.

            Here’s an excerpt from a Bloomberg article by Fouad Ajami:

            We wanted a clear message from Obama that the U.S. will continue to support democracy in Afghanistan,” Fawzia Koofi, a lawmaker and human-rights activist, said this month. “It’s the only alternative to Talibanization.”

            Her honesty revealed the plain truth, without official pieties and doublespeak: The U.S. is quitting Afghanistan, and the morning after it does, the Taliban will begin the reconquest of that tragic land. After 11 years, and a toll of more than 2,000 Americans killed, 18,000 wounded, and the expenditure of more than $600 billion, what is perhaps the longest U.S. war is winding down.

            There remain earnest Afghan women such as Fawzia Koofi and those schoolgirls we glimpse in their uniforms when our television crews venture into that country. One shudders in fear and anxiety for them. They won’t be able to board the flights for Dubai. They will be there when the pitiless soldiers of the Taliban, like the Khmer Rouge of Cambodia, sweep in and overwhelm all that the foreign protectors had left in place.

          • charleo1

            For my money, the author has good reason to be
            concerned. If only, there were agreement by the Afghans
            themselves, the Taliban should not return. Perhaps then,
            some solutions to the other profound deficiencies could
            be found. In other words, if there is a will, there could
            probably be a way found. Without it, we could be there for
            the next 100 years. I think a lot of people see it that way.
            There is simply no longer the political will to stay, in the
            numbers necessary to rehabilitate their Country ourselves.
            But we can say, as for us. We didn’t abandon them.
            And for the first time in a thousand years, there could be
            real progress. We’ve built schools, roads, electric, and
            water facilities. We’ve taught farmers how to grow crops,
            other than the poppy. Shown them better ways to irrigate, and fertilize, and provided better roads to get their crops
            to market. Other challenges, such as a literacy rate, only
            in the single digits now, could be turned around fairly
            quickly. All these things are possible. But, only if they buy
            in, and choose to make it so. Because, it’s been their refusal
            to accept modernity, that has been their greatest impediment to progress. So, only the Afghans themselves will produce

            the final outcome.

          • Independent1

            I think a lot of what happens after we leave depends on the war lords; if they encourage their clans to fight the Taliban, as they were doing some months ago, it’s possible they could keep them from taking back control of the country. If the war lords see the advantages of the improvements you noted we’ve made to the country, and don’t want to see that all reversed by the Taliban, maybe there’s a chance they will help keep the Taliban down. A great deal is up to the Afghans themselves, as you pointed out, we can’t stay and help protect them much longer.

          • charleo1

            I agree. It’s interesting this, non-centralized, tribal based
            form of organizing themselves, seems to be very similar to
            the way Native Americans organized themselves. Forming
            loose alignments between Chieftains where they found
            mutual benefits. Protection, trade, perhaps marriages.
            And, we can assume they probably do not all get along. About this same time, as the press started running these
            info-mericals on the Taliban. They covered a fellow who
            was living in the U.S. and going to one of the universities here. His Father, or Brother, I forget which, died. So. it fell
            to him to go back to this very remote area, and be a War Lord. So,there he was, one day working on his college degree. The next, in native garb, riding a horse, leading his people! What we have been attempting to do is win the hearts, and minds of these leaders. (General Petraus,) By sending a platoon out, and making contact with the group, getting an appointment to talk to the Chief. And convince
            him coming over to our side, is a really good deal. This is dangerous work. Because, sometimes they got to talk to
            the Chief. And sometimes, the Chief said, sure, come on up! Then, would ambush our guys when they showed up. And they’d have to fight their way out. But, here again, our
            biggest hurdle is convincing these guys, if they buy in, we’re not going to leave them at the mercy of the Taliban. So, now if you’re the War Lord, what would you do?

    • Justin Napolitano

      Option, you are a little short on facts. The Data collected and analysed by the Prism program is Metadata. it looks at patterns of information and not the information itself. Here is an example. Suppose I suspect that a certain building is hiding a terrorist cell. The information that would be of value is what are the phone numbers that service that building and are those numbers making calls to a known terrorist group in another country. It is not necessary to listen to the calls to determine if there is reason for concern. If it is determined that there is indeed calls being made to known terrorist groups then a warrant can be issued that permits listening to those calls. If, on the other hand, there is no calls to terrorist groups then no further action is needed.
      It is the patterns of call data that is important and not the actual calls themselves. No one is listening to the billions of phone calls being made in the US every day.

      • charleo1

        Good job of explaining what metadata is, and why it is necessary.
        I’ve tried numerous times to no avail. It seems some have gotten
        this picture in their brain, of Big Brother sitting in an unmarked van
        outside their house, the G-men inside, wearing these huge head phones, listening in on their every conversation. If only the govn’t
        cared half as much about what I say!

    • angelsinca

      “Is their(sic) a country that exists he (McCain) does not want to invade?”

      Compared to Obama’s apparent lust to invade, McCain’s supposed wishes seem pedestrian.

  • Dominick Vila

    What are these two Bozos proposing, invading Russia to seize Snowden? BTW, Vladimir Putin acknowledged Snowden was in Russia, and added that he could not arrest him and deport it because Russian laws and, most importantly, the lack of an extradition accord between the USA and Russia tied his hands and prevented to comply with the requests he received from the Obama administration.
    Incidentally, the reason we don’t have an extradition accord with Russia is because we refused to establish one in the Soviet era, for obvious reasons.
    As for Obama being reluctant to make tough decisions to seize enemies of the USA, let’s not forget the way he ignored the Pakistani government when he ordered the raid that ended the life of Osama bin Laden, after Musharraf played cat and mouse with Bush for decades while protecting that murderer and receiving billions of foreign aid dollars from the USA.
    This latest attempt to establish a parallel between the pathetic Republican performance of years past, when 3,000 people and two icons of American might were destroyed on U.S. soil, and when a dozen U.S. diplomatic missions were attacked by terrorists, because one U.S. consulate was destroyed during Obama’s tenure, highlights the desperation of a party devoid of constructive ideas and desperate to hide their failures. We may have short memories for many things, but there are certain things we will never forget, and 9/11 and the near collapse of the U.S. economy are two of them.

    • marysolvel

      you are so right!! In 2014 we have to elect a democratic house, and they may allow the president to do something.

      • angelsinca

        “we have to elect a democratic house, and they may allow the president to do something”

        Already BTDT. It didn’t work out too well, so says the votes that changed it.

        • Independent1

          Already what nitwit!! The Democrats have had control of Congress for all of 7 1/2 months in the past 18 years and during that time they went forward with the Stimulus and AutoBailouts that virtually every economists predict kept America from falling into the GOPs SECOND CREATED DEPRESSION. AND, they also got universal healthcare passed that no previous administration had been able to do. AND, had Ted Kennedy not died on 8/15/09 and the dummies in Mass. voted Scott Brown into office, they would have accomplished a great deal more. You’re about as clueless as rock – Oh! but you are a dumb rock!!

          • angelsinca

            Regardless of the supposed achievements you wan’t to boast about for the DNC supermajority under Obama, those ‘historic accomplishments’ mean NOTHING when you have no honor to back it up. All honor is lost when deception is considered an acceptable victor over truth and disclosure. Especially when most of those actions have caused divisive malcontent for tens of millions.

            If you ever accepted alternate views without ridicule, without mocking, you might become relevant outside your own little comfort zone. thanks.

          • Independent1

            Your right, I’m not going to accept alternate views coming from a party that I’m convinced now is being run by the Devil. You can be absolutely sure of that. So until the time when the GOP starts proving that it’s not hellbent on sending all of it’s followers to damanation – I’m not accepting any of its views!!! Of that you can be sure!!!!

          • angelsinca

            “…I’m not going to accept alternate views coming from a party that I’m convinced now is being run by the Devil”

            Your choice to be closed minded won’t be debated. It makes the supposed “obstructionism” by republicans seem sane and reasonable.

            With your assertion that the GOP is run by the “Devil” (LOL) and the evagelicals convinced that Obama is the antichrist, are all in a world of sh-t. It wasn’t like this 4½ years ago when it was only the wacko presidents of Iran and Venezuela that proclaimed Bush as the Devil.

          • Independent1

            It’s amazing how accurate Amandinejad and Chavez were back then in describing Bush – and they weren’t wrong.

            And you can bet I’m closed minded to virtually anything that comes from a political party that is spouting lies, distortions and fantasies today that they’ve been spouting since the worst president in American history started brainwashing their minds with fairytale ideas since back in the 1980s that are still working to destroy the country. It’s going to take a long time for the GOP to undo the damage they’ve already done to America with their absolute garbage ideas and proposals. I’ve reached the point where I wouldn’t vote for a GOP candidate if his name was Abraham Lincoln, not because I wouldn’t possibly agree with or respect the candidate, but because I know how corrupt and devoid of any decency the party that stands behind him is.

          • angelsinca

            I respect how you feel. Though, it is sadly amusing that I hear the EXACT SAME THINGS being said about Democrats from the extreme right. Eventually, one side will have the courage to collectively lay down their notions and biases in order to respect and accept the views of the other. Or, we remain a polarized conglomerate of disagreement and accusation.

        • nkiflemar

          But we have NOT had a veto proof majority and a never had in the senate either because of Ted Kennedy’s absense and Al Frankin’s recount, thus we never had the 60 votes as so many on the right would make you think along with FOX. Then there are idiot blue dogs!

          • angelsinca

            Thanks for the clarification. I don’t believe this Democrat president would veto anything passed by a simple majorty of Dems, or arranged during the Dem supermajority.

    • jarheadgene

      Maybe these two MORONS…could suggest a drone attack. :)

    • mah101

      Dominick, we didn’t just loose 3,000 people and two icons of American might, we lost our way as well. For the following eight years we heard nothing but fear mongering and blustering. We threw away our values and passed the Patriot Act resulting in more and more loss of personal liberties. We aided and abetted the terrorists by doing what they could not do, destroy our identity, values, and sense of community. Sure we were all united on 9/11/01, but we haven’t been more divided today as a result than at any time perhaps since the 1850s.

      We lost more than people, planes and buildings that day. I certainly hope we can work hard to regain what we threw away in the name of “security”. I don’t expect much progress as long as people like McCain and Ryan are given the opportunity to profit from division.

      • Dominick Vila

        You are correct in pointing out the damage done to our society, our confidence, and our international credibility by all the fear mongering, deceit, and the immature – or greedy – reactions by the Bush administration. Having said that, I am convinced that the threat of terrorism is real and that we must remain vigilant and do everything we can to minimize the probability of more terrorist attacks. Needless to say, that requires a lot more than effective surveillance, it also requires a re-evaluation of our foreign policy and the way we interact with other nations.

        • John Pigg

          I can understand your worries about terrorism. But statistically, terrorism is incredibly rare. Although, we have had several high profile attacks in recent years you are still more likely to be shot by a police officer or struck by lightning.

          Isn’t it about time that we admitted that the Patriot Act is wrong, and so is PRISM?

          • Independent1

            What you’re failing to recognize John is that, if terrorism is “incredibly rare.” as you put it, it’s ONLY been because the Patriot Act and Prism have allowed governments around the world to prevent well over 50 terrorist attacks over the past 6-7 years. And with these attacks HAVING BEEN PREVENTED, we have no way of knowing how many people’s around the world would have died had they not been stopped . It could have been thousands or tens of thousands. For you to say “Although, we have had several high profile attacks in recent years you are still more likely to be shot by a police officer or struck by lighting.” IS PURE NONSENSE!! More people died in one terrorist attack on 9/11 (more than 3,000) than have been killed by lightening or by a police officer shooting them than in all of history. Where did you come up with such nonsense???

            I’m not pretending that the Patriot Act is perfect and shouldn’t be changed. But far too many Americans, yourself apparently included, ARE FAR TOO PARANOID, about what the NSA and others are doing with PRISM. I’ll guarantee you that it has accomplished FAR MORE GOOD, than the majority of Americans will give it credit for doing – than it has created harm to any American.

            Americans have to remember that the people working at NSA are not your everyday hoods and criminals – they’re a very select group of our countrymen who have ALL had to pass the rigourous background and ethical investigation for a top secret security clearance. It’s totally unfortunate that millions of Americans have the misguided notion that NSA is staffed with nothing but people who are hellbent on trying to steal the average Americans personal information – what utter nonsense!!!!! And it’s totally unfortunate that the agency that was chosen to checkout Snowden fell down in its objective and approved a clearance for an obvious idiot and lowlife like Him. You can be sure that it is being investigated for that failure.

          • John Pigg

            http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/04/statistics-you-are-not-going-to-be-killed-by-terrorists.html

            It’s not nonsense its a factual argument.

            You have no idea how paranoid I am about PRISM and the Patriot Act. All you know is that I view it as an errosion of our Constitutional Civil Liberties.

            I don’t care how trustworthy they individuals working on the PRISM project are. The very existence of this data collection program violates the constitution (In my opinion). This technology and programs runs a very high risk of abuse which I believe could be met the old fashioned way. Training agents to infiltrate terror cells. It takes longer and is more expensive but that is how you learn more about the people we are fighting. Not collecting everybodies data and investigating without probable cause.

            You seem to believe that I do not respect the risks of terrorism, which might be fair. But in my opinion, terrorist organizations gain more support from “Guantanamo, Drones, Assassinations, and Pakistani Collateral damage” than these programs prevent.

            Once you allow terrorists to control the propaganda war and control the narrative they will continue to freely recruit and raising funding all over the Muslim world.

          • John Pigg
          • Independent1

            John, what I called nonsense was your statement about lighting strikes and police shootings exceeding terrorist attacks. Between 2000 and 2012 there have been well over 3,300 people killed in America due to terrorist related attacks (and that includes the boston bombers); in contrast there have only been about 650 people killed by lightning during that time. I doubt seriously that there have been over 2,500 innocent people shot by a police officer. So your comment was nonsense – it was not based on facts.

            And you say that in your opinion that what the NSA is doing violates the 4th Amendment. I’m not sure that SCOTUS would agree with that (they may but I have my doubts). There’s a caveat in the 4th amendment – you are not guaranteed freedom from ALL searches and seizures ONLY FROM UNREASONABLE SEARCHES AND SEIZURES. The keyword here John is UNREASONABLE. By thinking that what the NSA is doing violates the 4th amendment, you’re basically saying that you believe that the NSA doing everything it can to keep Americans from being killed by terrorists is UNREASONABLE. Do you really think the Supreme Court would agree with that? Especially if President Obama can prove that the monitoring the NSA is doing has prevented more than 50 terrorist attacks that may have saved thousands of people’s lives?

            What the 4th Amendment protects you from John are searches and seizures such as a cop arbitrarily stopping you on the street and wanting to frisk you; or a police department just thinking that you may be guilty of something and charging into your home to start searching for evidence when they really don’t have any proof (or search warrant); or a cop stopping you while driving because of your race/color and thinking that you look suspicious – those are UNREASONABLE SEARCHES.

          • John Pigg

            You are more likely to be struck by lightning than die in a terror attack. Once again this is based on probability. Yes, 9/11 attacks killed countless numbers of our fellow citizens. But across time they have measured the probability of being struck by lightning at 1/5.5 million., the odds of being killed by a terrorist are 1/20 million. Once again this is based on probabilities, not body counts. http://reason.com/archives/2011/09/06/how-scared-of-terrorism-should

            You cite that these programs have prevented 50 terror attacks. But when pressed about the nature of those attacks Alexander claimed he could not divulge the information due to national security concerns. It’s amusing that any honest conversation over these programs can’t take place because they are secret.

            I consider being stopped and frisked and having my data collected without my consent, as essentially similar programs. And without probable cause of either me being intoxicated or a terrorist, I would argue they both are unconstitutional.

            EDIT/Note: I never claimed you to be innocent when killed with a cop, merely that this is more likely than dying in a terrorist attack.

          • Independent1

            Have it your way – but you’re still missing the point. One of the big reasons that the probablity of being killed in a terrorist attack is 1/20 million as you quote IS BECAUSE the NSA surveillence has drastically decreased the incidence of terrorist attacks actually killing anyone. And you are also missing the point about the NSA “frisking your phone calls or emails”. With 2.4 billion phone calls made every day, and more than 294 billion emails made every day, the probability that NSA is ever actually “frisking your phone calls or emails” is probably far greater than you ever being struck by lightening. How in creation can you imagine that a NSA person would be looking through YOUR EMAIL when there are 2.4 million of them sent a second; or monitoring your PHONE CALL when if there were 10,000 operators monitoring phone calls, the operator would have to pick YOUR call to monitor from within 240,000. It boggles my mind that there are people really believing that NSA is monitoring THEIR CALL or EMAIL – UNLESS OF COURSE, the NSA has some reason to believe that they are engaged in some form of terrorism – via some other intelligence info. And what irks me the most, is people who are so self-centered that they put more importance on their paranoia than possibly saving the lives of thousands of other people.

          • John Pigg

            Yes, your risk of being killed in terror is quite small. But I disagree with you that this is related to the PRISM program. I am against the program, you are for it. I am not going to believe the directors of the program when they say it works because it is in the interests of their job to say so. You will believe the directors of the program because they are highly trained and highly competent intelligence administrators.

            Fundamentally, there can be no way we agree on this issue. We both see it very strongly and have logical reasons for thinking as such.

          • Independent1

            I forgot to address your comment about why Alexander couldn’t divulge more about the attacks that have been prevented – why they’re secret. The NSA has already found that Snowden’s traitorous actions have already resulted in terrorist groups finding other ways to communicate – they’ve already seen a reduction in the chatter between individuals in terrorist groups using phone calls and emails – Snowden’s revelations may well result in attacks which the NSA had leads on, actually being accomlished now because Snowden let the cat out of the bag. If so, he could directly be responsible for people dying. And in a similar way, if Alexander went into real detail about attacks that have been thwarted, that could well give terrorist groups insight into how to get around divulging their intents. Unfortunately, even legislators are clueless to how sensitive intelligence information is – Darrell Issa is a great example of that – by constantly pressing the Whitehouse to diviluge more about the communications that went on around the Benghazi attack, he’s intentionally or unintentionally trying to get the Whitehouse to divulge to terrorists what information the CIA had and how it may have gotten it; which of course any intelligence agency would prefer they didn’t find out. .

          • John Pigg

            Perhaps that is true, perhaps it isn’t. I have no faith in what I hear from the NSA.

            I completely understand executive privilege in regards to Benghazi. But any conversation over these programs should include in depth analysis of the specific plots being thwarted. If they cannot provide deeper information related to these potential terrorist then their testimony is essentially worthless.

            Congressional leaders asked members of the intelligence community months before if they were collecting data on Americans, they said they were not.

          • Justin Napolitano

            You still don’t get it do you. The government is collecting metadata. Here is a explanation:

            Metadata is the data collected and analyzed by the Prism
            program. It looks at patterns of information and not the information itself. Here is an example. Suppose I suspect that a certain building is hiding a terrorist cell. The information that would be of value is what are the phone numbers that service that building and are those numbers making calls to a
            known terrorist group in another country. It is not necessary to listen to the calls to determine if there is reason for concern. If it is determined that there is indeed calls being made to known terrorist groups then a warrant can be issued that permits listening to those calls. If, on the other hand, there
            is no calls to terrorist groups then no further action is needed.

            It is the patterns of call data that is important and not the actual calls themselves. No one is listening to the billions of phone calls being made in the US every day. And the collection of metadata is not unconstitutional since telephone companies do it all of the time to determine when more service needs to be added to a given area. banks do it to determine lending information, car dealers to determine what products are selling the best and how their competitors are doing. In fact it is called information technology and I have
            been in that industry for 50 years.

          • John Pigg

            I don’t have a problem with Banks doing it. I have a problem with the Federal government doing it.

          • Justin Napolitano

            You are a part of the propaganda war when you question everything the US government is doing and assume it is not required and is infringing on your personal rights. Please explain what right you have given up and how your life has been effected by Prism

          • John Pigg

            The right of all Americans is innocent until proven guilty. Until there is probable cause the government has no right to investigate or collect data.

            You are right I do oppose the government when the government acts incorrectly. But it would be far easier for the US government to win the propaganda war if it wasn’t torturing people (Bush Admin), assassinating Americans without trial, excessive collateral damage in Pakistan, and prosecuting whistleblowers to the fullest extent of the law.

            I am not worried about my private personal email, or data. I am far more worried about the precedent being set and what it says for a liberal democracy. This is on the same level as an authoritarian state, this program is far more similar to communist China than France.

            Keeping your mouth shut when the US makes enormous blunders in the War on Terror is not Patriotic. Patriotism is standing up for our principles even when it does not affect me.

          • Justin Napolitano

            John, you are missing the point. Terrorist’s goal is to get us to react. And shouldn’t we with the best tool we have: “intelligence?” It is best to combat terrorist with that weapon rather than spend the wealth of our nation and the lives of our soldiers. To not use every means necessary is to invite more attacks which inevitably leads to fighting more wars and expending our wealth and our military until we are broke. look how well it worked with 9/11.
            I do believe there are safeguards in place and I have faith in our government. Perhaps the biggest tool and threat is terrorists ability to force us to question our government.
            I don’t and neither should you because when you do so you just play into the hands of the terrorists.

          • John Pigg

            Yes, I agree intelligence is important. But what kind? Data collected indiscriminately on all American citizens? Or training or gaining access to terror organizations and flipping their members.

            The one that is hard, is the one that is more effective. By infiltrating these organization and relying on HUMINT we stand to gain much more. HUMINT allows us to see what their actual capabilities are, what their actual ideologies are, and what they are most concerned with.

            These programs are not effective and the money could be better spent on bribing their members and building up extensive HUMINT capabilities.

    • DurdyDawg

      Just shows why the pubs are so angry they didn’t get the big clown cap.. They’re itching for another world war. Even the Mittwit alleged to it when he said in one of his yawning speeches that Russia was our worst enemy. Their all brain dead which gives them the self-righteous belief that no matter how or what they say.. it will stir the zombies and become a truth with enough repetition.

  • DAK27

    If I were speaking for President Obama, my message would be short and clear:

    “Fucking crybabies… I beat you both in two different elections and this is just sour grapes. Go fuck off somewhere else and get back to work.”

    • marysolvel

      sadly, the POTUS won’t say that, but I WILL. LOOOOOSERS………

    • jarheadgene

      Ha….HEAR, HEAR….Also very well said. Next I expect Mitty boy to pop up saying, “If I were President….”

      • tax payer

        It’s like hearing a Gay say, If only I was Gay.

    • angelsinca

      Similar message already applied throughout the Bush presidency, and beyond.

  • JDavidS

    I have at least grudging respect for McCain. As for Lyin’ Ryan, he’s the biggest asshole on Capitol Hill and doesn’t have the IQ of a bag of hammers… as he proves time and again with his asinine “budgets”. He epitomizes all that is wrong with the RepubliCONs/Tea Clowns… lying, deceitful, underhanded and stupid. That goof would be incapable of running a church bingo, never mind the country.

    • jarheadgene

      HEAR, HEAR…..VERY well said !!!!

      • Russell Byrd

        AMEN!

    • johninPCFL

      The guy who couldn’t remember how many houses he owned a few years’ back is suggesting that the President should be involved in directing the travel arrangements of a low-level functionary of a civilian contractor? Too funny.

      • angelsinca

        The guy who couldn’t recall HIS OWN birthdate is our president. Not so funny.

  • Ford Truck

    If McCain had been elected in 2008, we would not only still be involved in Iraq, we would also be more heavily involved in Afghanistan that we still are, and we would currently be in a war in Iran, and possibly in a war with North Korea.

    Now these idiots wants us to go to war with China or Russia or wherever else Snowden is hiding? Yes, I want Snowden brought back the the U.S. where he can be tried for treason and executed, but I don’t think getting into another war is necessary.

    I have never agree with anything Ryan has said and see him as a useless piece of crap! I have rarely agreed with McCain’s political stance, but as a fellow ‘Nam vet, I had always had honor and respect for his service. He’s used up that ticket though, and has become just another bitter old man struggling to stay relevant, but failing miserably!!

  • howa4x

    McCain never met a conflict he didn’t like and always wants Americans to jump in. If Ryan was Pinocchio, he would have a 3 foot nose

  • docb

    Do people really flock to watch these crazies inane utterances? Can not imagine.

    That said, I would venture a guess that mccain knows a great about impotence as it applies to himself personally and his political ambitions historically! Lyin ryan has not a clue!

    • angelsinca

      “Do people really flock to watch these crazies inane utterances”

      Only when highlighted by liberal blogs to mock the GOP. The personal remark toward McCain’s sexual vitality is completely unnecessary. BTW his political ambitions, as US senator for probably longer than you’ve been alive, are likely more significant than you could ever hope to achieve. I don’t like what he said about Obama either, but I cut the man slack because of his tenure as a tortured prisoner that gave his fellow pow’s hope to get thru the horrors.

      • docb

        Presumption is not your friend, breity and fox user. At 67, I am almost as old as mccain and know about the issues of men that age and have a grasp of the his political history. My chosen profession has never been politics but I have considerable credentials and accomplishments in my profession.

        Does that ‘slack’ extend to the fact that he flipped to the VC in 3 days after he had crashed 5 jets and is reported to be responsible for the deaths of 132 on the USS Forrestal he did a ‘wet start’unapproved or the Keating 5?

        • angelsinca

          The personal remark toward McCain’s sexual vitality is still completely unnecessary, friend. Speaking of presumption, the ‘fox user’ remark is a bit off mark, as well, as is blaming him for the tragic deaths aboard the Forrestal.

          Not sure how you can pin the Forrestal incident on McCain. It seems like a conspiratorial stretch. Unless, you blame him for the improper storage of the unstable AN-M65A1 fat boy bombs left over from the war twenty years earlier, or the power surge that ignited the ordinace or the decisions by Captain John Beling that kept the bombs on the flight deck instead of the ordinance bay. McCain was a pilot, not in a position to do anything to cause or prevent the 132 deaths. Nothing.

          When McCain’s aircraft was on the flight deck awaiting take off, and the flames began to engulf his aircraft from the first explosion, he did what he had to save his hide and jumped out the cockpit, sliding down the nose to safety. To blame him for the calamity that ensued is PRESUMPTIVE and untrue, by all accounts, except the one you choose to believe.
          This false admonishment of McCain pretty much discredits whatever else you have to say. But, I will research the other accusations you presented and make an effort to get back to you. Thanks.

        • angelsinca

          McCain was exonerated from wrong doing in the Keating Five scandal. He went on to create legislation to prevent similar misdeeds to prove the worth of his character.

          Who cares how many jets he supposedly ‘crashed’, except that he was shot down and survived, repeatedly while serving the country. Not sure how this is a negative.

          On his 23rd bombing mission, he was shot down and captured. He remained a POW for FIVE YEARS. They beat him when he was injured from being shot down and provided medical treatment only after learning he was an Admiral’s son. He stayed in the hospital for 6 weeks revcovering. In the hospital, he lost 50 lbs and his hair turned white. When released from the hospital, he was placed in a cell with 2 Americans that were not expected to survive. The VC offered an early release to McCain for propaganda purpose, but he refused unless the other prisoners were also released. They rejected McCain’s demands. Shorty therafter, he was put in solitary for TWO YEARS. The brutal beatings began. During the torture sessions, he became despondent and tried to commit suicide. The guards stopped him. He signed a confession to stop the torture but wrote about the regret by saying everyone has breaking point. This is hardly ‘flipping to the VC in 3 days’.

          So, yes, the man deserves a pass. Don’t really care if he pissed off some pansy-ass keyboard monkey because he opposed Obama, the no-service newb. McCain deserves a pass on a friggin’ silver platter, as a national hero. This is one reason I voted for him.

          • dtgraham

            Darn rights. John McCain is an American hero. Some talk of his combat missions, others his POW experiences. Personally, I’ll always remember Senator John McCain for heroically carrying a brain damaged woman through an entire U.S. Presidential campaign.

          • angelsinca

            Another Sarah Palin fan

          • dtgraham

            Not sure I’d go that far angelsinca. Actually I’m sure I wouldn’t. I understand she’s back at Fixed News again. God, she even quit quitting.

          • angelsinca

            When you try to place yourself in the shoes of anyone that has been brutally tortured for the sake of his country, it makes poking fun at Sarah Palin and Fox News petty. Very petty.

          • dtgraham

            And my goodness gracious, who would poke fun at Caribou Barbie and Fixed News except those who’re being exceptionally petty or those who’re somehow disrespecting John McCain by doing so. Whom else I ask?

            Is there some way I can poke fun at Fixed News and Sarah Palin without placing myself in John McCain’s shoes?

          • angelsinca

            The pettiness isn’t the source. It’s the activity.

          • dtgraham

            You know, you’re right angelsinca. Fixed News and Sarah Palin are stand alone insults. I don’t need to hide behind John McCain. Point taken.

  • elw

    I say let them talk, they hurt themselves more than they hurt the President. Everytime I hear them start-up with their crazy talk, I remind myself that their approval rating is the lowest in history. They are just digging their own grave.

  • Lovefacts

    Aren’t these two–along with other Republicans–the ones who’ve been insisting the government needs to privatize our national security, including but not limited to: border security, background clearance investigations, and, given the number of military contractors, they’d probably go for privatizing the military as a whole. According to them, private business can always do the job better and cheaper plus it’s supposedly easier on the budget. NOT!
    When the government Now, that’s a provable lie. Every time the government outsources/privatizes a job, the cost increases faster than inflation or the salary of government employees.

  • RobertCHastings

    Hey guys, it is really difficult for ANYONE to have it both ways. The genie is out of the bottle, a bottle that should have ever been fabricated in the first place, and you two helped make it.

    • DurdyDawg

      Let’s just say that hate is running amok and it seems everybody has been infected with it in one way or the other. Look around, visit other forums.. you’ll see that I’m correct. How did it start? Somebody didn’t like the presidential outcome.. When did it start? Right after Dubya left that bulging easter basket for his successor to take the blame.

      • RobertCHastings

        I think it started long before that. The pranks you speak of have occurred pretty much after EVERY president leaves the White House. I recall the rampant complaints by Bush staffers about the condition Clinton left the White House in. It took something bigger than that to get the ball rolling, although its current vehemence could indicate it was something recent. It would be easy to say that the extreme partisanship began with the ascendancy of the Tea Party, but that just isn’t so, either. Politicians throughout the history of our country have expressed their willingness to die for their convictions, duels were fought among Congressmen in the 19th century, fights have actually broken out on the floor of Congress over political differences. What is happening to Obama is no worse than what happened to Clinton. Hell, you may be right, though, because when some examination is done, the WORST of the partisan divide does seem to be occurring right now.

  • tax payer

    When I read ATTACKED does it mean they PHYSICALLY attacked him. If it was nothing but WORDS than it was ONLY a SHOW.

  • nkiflemar

    So in their view, Obama should go bomb Russia and China and then just carpet bomb Syria!? Oh, okay…now I get it!

scroll to top