Gun Hub Forums banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
KevinGibson,

Can you NAME a single POSITIVE thing that has been done by the ZERO MIS-administration?

yours, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
To be fair I think Kevin was refering to "the government" as an entity, not specifically to President Obama (whom I regard as an incompetent empty suit).
Having said that I have to wonder if the Beretta pistol we're discussing is really so bad that it merits replacement. If individual guns are so used they're falling apart, dangerous or inaccurate can't those individual guns be repaired or replaced?
Handguns are really auxiliary guns and while I would like to see our soldiers armed with guns that work when they need them I don't know why that can't be done with the Beretta; certainly it would seem we can develop a 9MM. round that is jacketed to conform with treaty but can still expand (maybe we already have one??) and can get them into the military distribution system....?

The last time I remember seeing something that was to be the next "wonder rifle" it was something like the "Objective Individual Combat Weapon" which IIRC looked like something out of a STAR WARS movie, and maybe too cumbersome for people to really carry easily .... and a bit to high tech -- by that I mean too complex and prone to breakage and **** that happens when you drop the gun.
I don't know what became of that monstrosity ... hopefully it resides in a special Gun Hell next to the Chauchat.
I'm not sure what I would want as the next army "battle rifle," but until someone decides we absolutly need to move on to something more powerful than the 5.56mm. perhaps we had better stick with the current AR/M4 type guns we have now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
KevinGibson,

Can you NAME a single POSITIVE thing that has been done by the ZERO MIS-administration?

yours, sw
Well he took our failing healthcare system and accelerated the rate at which it's failing. Oh wait, a positive thing...

Well as you know I'm independent, not a republican...so I'm physically capable of giving credit where credit is due.

He canceled several military projects that were in need of canceling (and some that weren't). F-22 (which I don't think has yet to fly a single combat mission), TLAM (replacement on the way, big stockpiles currently). Hellfire wasn't such a great idea; that was pre-mature.

He did kill the moon mission; that was a dumb arse idea.

The deficit has gone down every year since 2009. And regardless of what Republicans say/claim; I doubt government spending would have been much different under a republican. Stimulus was a republican plan, implemented by Obama. The only difference would have been WHAT the money was spent on.

Bin Laden DID take a dirt nap on Obama's watch. Obama made the call, he gets the credit whether you like it or not.

Passed the ONLY sanctions on Iran that ever worked (and then undermined them when they became inconvenient for China - although I'm not sure he could hold China to the sanctions if they didn't want to be held to them).

So the blind squirrel did actually get the odd nut.

But honestly, he was bound to get a few things right... The list of what he's done wrong would be 10x as big, and that's being generous. The man is so far out of his depth.

The worst crime perpetrated on the American people in my lifetime happened with a Republican president, and then was expanded by a Democrat. The loss of my right to privacy. So perhaps you can understand why I'm not real big on either party. I don't consider Republicans to be one iota better than Democrats; I consider them to be equally worthless...and the biggest threat to liberty we face in America.

Sorry I know that's not what you wanted to hear; but YOU asked!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,882 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
kKvinGibson,

1st: BHO was not even TOLD that the mission was to take out OBL (according to a retired Delta friend) until the choppers were actually in the air, as the commanders didn't trust the WH to keep their BIG OPEN mouths shut. - The WH was only told that they were going after a "high value Al Queda target"
Once he was told that the force was going after OBL, he had ONLY 2 options:
1. call back the force
or
2. allow the mission to go forward.
(Not much of a choice for anyone!)

What WORTHWHILE sanctions were ever successful in reality against Iran? = I don't know of a single one that worked.

Finally, I would give ZERO credit for killing some wasteful programs at DoD if he had not taken that money and BILLIONS more & thrown it down every worthless leftist RAT-hole.

In short, he is a conscience-less LIAR, an INCOMPETENT, completely AMORAL and UNFIT in every way to be on our local school board, much less infest the WH.
(Fyi, I never thought at 67YY that I would ever live to see any POTUS that is LESS competent than Carter & MORE dishonest than Nixon ever was.)

Btw, while I'm registered as GOP (you MUST register here with a party.), I'm a TEA PARTY member & a CONSERVATIVE.

yours, sw
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
Well he took our failing healthcare system and accelerated the rate at which it's failing. Oh wait, a positive thing...

Well as you know I'm independent, not a republican...so I'm physically capable of giving credit where credit is due.
Imposing Obamacare was a positive thing? Our healthcare system needed help but leaving it alone would have been a better alternative. People are losing their insurance because of what President Emptysuit has foisted on us.

He canceled several military projects that were in need of canceling (and some that weren't). F-22 (which I don't think has yet to fly a single combat mission), TLAM (replacement on the way, big stockpiles currently). Hellfire wasn't such a great idea; that was pre-mature.
The F-15 also didn't fly a combat mission until it did --and when it did was proven to be (for its day) a great fighter. The F-22 is a potentially great fighter. It easily outflew and out maneuvered an F-16 in one presentation I saw. Obama was very very wrong to downsize our order of them, and we'll be pretty much stuck with what we have as you just don't start up production lines again.
If Obama really wanted to TKO a military plane of questionable merit he ought to cancel the F-35. Oh wait, he might. After all it IS a military aircraft and he won't mind downsizing at all (neither do our country's enemies, BTW).
.

He did kill the moon mission; that was a dumb arse idea.
The deficit has gone down every year since 2009. And regardless of what Republicans say/claim; I doubt government spending would have been much different under a republican. Stimulus was a republican plan, implemented by Obama. The only difference would have been WHAT the money was spent on.

Bin Laden DID take a dirt nap on Obama's watch. Obama made the call, he gets the credit whether you like it or not.
The deficit's gone down but the national debt continues to rise. And Obama doesn't get credit for the diminishing deficit -- it actually resulted from the fact that the two parties couldn't agree on a budget and that knocked a bunch of spending out.
Bin Laden? I thought SEAL TEAM 6 got him. Obama made the call, yes, after being dragged kicking and screaming into doing it. Wow. There's impressive leadership ... we got better leadership from George A. Custer at the Little Bighorn.
I wish Obama was showing the same firm resolve against ISIS he did against Bin Laden ..... oh wait, maybe he's building up to it....

Passed the ONLY sanctions on Iran that ever worked (and then undermined them when they became inconvenient for China - although I'm not sure he could hold China to the sanctions if they didn't want to be held to them).

So the blind squirrel did actually get the odd nut.
The sanctions on Iran would have ultimatly failed no matter what.

But honestly, he was bound to get a few things right... The list of what he's done wrong would be 10x as big, and that's being generous. The man is so far out of his depth.

The worst crime perpetrated on the American people in my lifetime happened with a Republican president, and then was expanded by a Democrat. The loss of my right to privacy. So perhaps you can understand why I'm not real big on either party. I don't consider Republicans to be one iota better than Democrats; I consider them to be equally worthless...and the biggest threat to liberty we face in America.

Sorry I know that's not what you wanted to hear; but YOU asked!
I'm not a big fan of what Shrubbie did with regards eavesdropping and the "patriot" act myself but IMHO it is not "The worst crime perpetrated on the American people in my lifetime," I guess that would have to be Watergate, since it actually would have caused Nixon's impeachment AND ultimate removal from office had he not resigned. There are plenty of other things done in the 20th century (outside of my own lifetime) I consider worse than the patriot act. The income tax amendment, the removal by amendment of the right of the state governments to appoint senators, the National Firearm act of '34, The Gulf of Tonkin (SP??) (oh wait THAT was in my lifetime).....and I suppose I could think of others.

Here's one thing I think we CAN agree upon:

"No man's life, liberty or property are safe while the legislature is in session," New York State Surrogate Court Judge John Tucker, 1886.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
Imposing Obamacare was a positive thing? Our healthcare system needed help but leaving it alone would have been a better alternative. People are losing their insurance because of what President Emptysuit has foisted on us.
Tommy, I think you missed my sarcasm. While I don't think Obamacare is a good thing, I don't think it's the end of the world. Our medical system was failing fast before, now it's just failing faster. Regardless, it's going to fail. You're right, it's not a good thing.

The F-15 also didn't fly a combat mission until it did --and when it did was proven to be (for its day) a great fighter. The F-22 is a potentially great fighter. It easily outflew and out maneuvered an F-16 in one presentation I saw. Obama was very very wrong to downsize our order of them, and we'll be pretty much stuck with what we have as you just don't start up production lines again.
If Obama really wanted to TKO a military plane of questionable merit he ought to cancel the F-35. Oh wait, he might. After all it IS a military aircraft and he won't mind downsizing at all (neither do our country's enemies, BTW).
We have over 180 F-22's and there is no aircraft in the world that has a snowball's chance against one; I think we're good. To buy more of this incredibly expensive aircraft just doesn't make economical sense especially considering the F-35 will be deployed in the next 2-3 years. No one is killing he F-35, the DOD is in for a pound on that one and it will happen. Maybe we won't buy as many as previously intended, but the F-35 will happen. There are already large orders for F-35's from allied nations. The F-35 is probably not quite as capable as a dogfighter/interceptor as the F-22, but it will still chew up anything else in the world so it's more than adequate. And if the past 30 years have taught us anything, the role of the dogfighter has greatly diminished…so it will be more than adequate for our needs.

The deficit's gone down but the national debt continues to rise. And Obama doesn't get credit for the diminishing deficit -- it actually resulted from the fact that the two parties couldn't agree on a budget and that knocked a bunch of spending out.
So if it were a Republican in office, you'd give him credit for reducing the deficit but if a Democrat is in office he doesn't get the credit…that's integrity. Not stumping for Obama, I'm just applying the same standards to both parties, something everyone ought to try on for size.

Bin Laden? I thought SEAL TEAM 6 got him. Obama made the call, yes, after being dragged kicking and screaming into doing it.
Regardless of which story you believe, he made the call, and he didn't take the chicken chit option.

The sanctions on Iran would have ultimatly failed no matter what.
Possibly because of China, I don't know that he could have done anything to keep them in line. But his sanctions did work, and it did get them to the table for talks. Since 1979 that is the ONLY sanctions that actually caused Iran to change their ways (not to the point of abandoning their nuke program, but they did back off some). The reality is, Iran will have a nuke whenever they decide to build one, and there's really nothing we can do about it. That ship sailed by about 2001. They were VERY smart in how they set things up.

I'm not a big fan of what Shrubbie did with regards eavesdropping and the "patriot" act myself but IMHO it is not "The worst crime perpetrated on the American people in my lifetime," I guess that would have to be Watergate, since it actually would have caused Nixon's impeachment AND ultimate removal from office had he not resigned.
SERIOUSLY? A scandal where ultimately the system worked, and that's worse to you than losing our fundamental right to privacy?

Look if you're able to read between the lines you should be able to see that I'm NO Obama fan whatsoever. It's just that I don't see Republicans as a viable solution to the problem. On the things that REALLY matter, the two parties are in lock step. All those other things that differentiate the two parties are just Red Herrings to keep us focused on things other than the HUGE issues that are really destroying America.

Both parties are for big government
Both parties are for the incremental erosion of our civil rights
Both parties are against a "fair tax"
Both parties are NOT for a balanced budget
Both parties support the loss of our right to privacy
Both parties support corporate rights over the rights of the individual (SCOTUS decisions Citizens United and McCutcheon)
Both parties refuse to properly regulate Wall Street (meaning we will ALWAYS bail them out; every time)
Both parties support US intervention in every damn issue in this world that is none of our business
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
kKvinGibson,

1st: BHO was not even TOLD that the mission was to take out OBL (according to a retired Delta friend) until the choppers were actually in the air, as the commanders didn't trust the WH to keep their BIG OPEN mouths shut. - The WH was only told that they were going after a "high value Al Queda target"
Once he was told that the force was going after OBL, he had ONLY 2 options:
1. call back the force
or
2. allow the mission to go forward.
(Not much of a choice for anyone!)
Your'e smarter than that. You REALLY think the US Military made the decision to invade a sovereign nation without the approval of the President? You've been reading too many stories from completely non-credible sources. (yes the Right has those too)

I can understand your disrespect of the President, but to think someone attacked another nation without presidential authorization is just crazy. EVERYONE involved in such an operation would go to jail! By the time OBL was killed he was operationally insignificant. Do you think the entire DOD would sign on to go to jail for something like that? Our military brass is smart, competent and politically savvy; they would NEVER do something like that. You can bet your bottom dollar the president was informed by the CIA the first second they thought Bin Laden was there; that's how the system works regardless of who's in the White House.

I understand your feelings toward Obama and for the most part share them. But I'm not so hyper political that I can't recognize right decisions when they're made regardless of the party. I think Obama has been horribly incompetent and downright evil; I detest him. But I apply the same standards to ANY politician regardless of party. I'll support what I believe to be a right decision regardless of party, and I'll oppose what I believe to be a wrong decision, regardless of party.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
:evil:
....... And if the past 30 years have taught us anything, the role of the dogfighter has greatly diminished…so it will be more than adequate for our needs...............
Gee, I wonder how many times that thought has been uttered since, say, 1919?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,727 Posts
F-22 (which I don't think has yet to fly a single combat mission)
Let me just suggest that a weapon system so dominant that no one is willing to challenge it should not be considered a failure. The combination of Raptor and AWACS means that, should enemy fighters be foolhardy enough to attempt flight, the missiles that will kill them could well in the air before they get their gear up.

From before Alexander armies have been looking for an overwhelming advantage that will make potential foes unwilling to fight. Along comes a system that approaches that elusive status, and what do people say? "Look, we never have to use it."

You can easily find online lists of all the engagements the F-15 has ever been involved in. Every one has been an Eagle victory...which means we have arrived at the previously unthinkable: the infinite kill ratio. Yet today we find ourselves in the situation where most young Eagle drivers never have to fire a shot in anger.

Do you start to see the connection? Because the poor bastards in those other cockpits sure do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,116 Posts
KG, the version I heard was that Panetta waited until he had a moment where Valerie Jarrett couldn't get in the way and was in a position to make an Executive Decision.

I'd also suspect, speaking ONLY as an armchair analyst, the lack of fallout other than to SEAL Six has been due to that decision handing the Messianic Psychopath in Chief a rare and BADLY needed bit of genuine good PR.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
KG, the version I heard was that Panetta waited until he had a moment where Valerie Jarrett couldn't get in the way and was in a position to make an Executive Decision.

I'd also suspect, speaking ONLY as an armchair analyst, the lack of fallout other than to SEAL Six has been due to that decision handing the Messianic Psychopath in Chief a rare and BADLY needed bit of genuine good PR.
The final decision was made at the last minute, but the President was informed and in on the op from the get go. Now how last minute, I don't know and I doubt anyone really knows for certain. But I guarantee you the Seal Team was not deployed until they were at least an option, and that would have been directed by the President, otherwise there are a lot of other places the DOD would want Seal Team Six to be.

In every such operation there is the first green light to begin the operation; that was given before they took off. You don't "surprise" a president with something like, "oh yeah, we're about to invade a sovereign nation...would you like to green light it?" That's called a career defining move.

Then they get to the point of no return, basically that would be before they cross into Pakistani air space, that's when the final green light is given or not.

There is no way this operation was handled without presidential approval every step of the way. To imply that it didn't is to imply our military is completely out of control and lawless...And I just think much higher about our military than that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,678 Posts
It seems to me that some people's hatred of the President overrides common sense; or perhaps just don't have an understanding of how the military operates regarding presidential authority.

I can understand that, I was that way when Clinton was in office and I was a die hard Republican. Since I've become what I call "politically enlightened" and now ignore things like conservative talk radio or liberal TV pontificating and do 100% of my own thinking, I believe I see much more clearly, and although I don't "hate" I do dislike quite evenly of both parties. I don't let my dislike of a politician cloud my judgment or common sense; I just call it like I see them regardless of whom the individual is or which party they belong to.

And generally speaking, if a story ever sounds really out there, chances are it's not true. Especially if it involves someone in government doing something illegal and no one on the other side challenging it. Those two parties HATE each other, and if there was any truth to the military attempting to invade a sovereign nation without presidential authority, you can bet your bottom dollar there would be a bunch of high ranking officers in deep kim-chee, oodles of lower ranking officers in custody or relieved of duty, and a HUGE scandal in the press...Hint, not all press is pro-Obama so it WOULD get out and it WOULD be a big, bad scandal for the military and Obama.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,543 Posts
Per the published book, and yeah I know, there was a mockup built at Bragg (they didn't name it, but where else would it have been) for training and a dress rehersal was (allegedly) run for a bunch of folks who definately weren't military. Some time after that, they had approval to stage overseas.

All that meant multiple approvals at high levels. I don't picture the risk (to career) adverse folks who populate the 0-7 and up ranks doing so without butt covering paper-with signatures.

As others have pointed out, I don't see a mission to right next door to the Pakistani Military Academy being done on the fly with a wink, a nod and a prayer for forgiveness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,627 Posts
Per the published book, and yeah I know, there was a mockup built at Bragg (they didn't name it, but where else would it have been) for training and a dress rehersal was (allegedly) run for a bunch of folks who definately weren't military. Some time after that, they had approval to stage overseas.

All that meant multiple approvals at high levels. I don't picture the risk (to career) adverse folks who populate the 0-7 and up ranks doing so without butt covering paper-with signatures.

As others have pointed out, I don't see a mission to right next door to the Pakistani Military Academy being done on the fly with a wink, a nod and a prayer for forgiveness.
I read the book by the SEAL who was 2nd or third through the door of OBL's bedroom and supposedly fired the "nailing shots" (OBL was down and dead...these were just to make REAL sure). He said the training mock up was in Georgia, but that could well have been disinformation.

I too firmly believe that Obama cleared the mission before anybody even boarded a chopper. As Kevin and Mr. Moore said, the brass wouldn't even try to make that decision on their own...POTUS would have to give the go-code. The fact that the accounts I have read have all mentioned that the "White House" (they never mentioned the Prez by name) had to "ponder on it", as we say here in Alabama, for quite a bit of time before he decided or was convinced to approve the mission. The intelligence was what it was...somebody of value was in that residence. There was too much tradecraft in use keeping the residents identity secret to have been anybody BUT an HVT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
Kevin Gibson said:
Tommy, I think you missed my sarcasm. While I don't think Obamacare is a good thing, I don't think it's the end of the world. Our medical system was failing fast before, now it's just failing faster. Regardless, it's going to fail. You're right, it's not a good thing.
You're right I DID miss your sarcasm. I apologize; yesterday was the culmination of a really bad weekend partially due to the fact that I am now directly being affected by Obamacare and was so p'o'd about it I could have spit 20MM. cannon shells.
Pretty hard to say nice things about .... certain political kritters ... when you are that ticked.

I get it that you're no friend of Obama.

Kevin Gibson said:
We have over 180 F-22's and there is no aircraft in the world that has a snowball's chance against one; I think we're good. To buy more of this incredibly expensive aircraft just doesn't make economical sense especially considering the F-35 will be deployed in the next 2-3 years. No one is killing he F-35, the DOD is in for a pound on that one and it will happen. Maybe we won't buy as many as previously intended, but the F-35 will happen. There are already large orders for F-35's from allied nations. The F-35 is probably not quite as capable as a dogfighter/interceptor as the F-22, but it will still chew up anything else in the world so it's more than adequate. And if the past 30 years have taught us anything, the role of the dogfighter has greatly diminished…so it will be more than adequate for our needs.
The problem is that this current generation of fighter will be with us for a long time. China is already fielding what is ostensibly a "stealth" fighter. The days of the MiG - 15, MiG-21 Fishbed, the MiG-25 Foxbat, are over. Current Soviet fighters are just as agile and efficient as the F-15 or F-16.
I question your assertion that the "role of the dogfighter has greatly diminished," here's why. Back when air-to air missiles were first developed (during the Korean War) we thought that modern air to air combat would be dominated by heat seeking sidewinder type missiles and the role of the 20mm. cannon was over. The same year I was born, 1955, was the same year the first F-4 Phantom flew, and the early versions had no in board cannon and were entirely a missile delivery system.
Then came Vietnam and the F-4 encountered planes like the MiG-15 and MiG-21.
And those missiles, so beloved .....didn't quite live up to their promise.
You know what an F-4 Phantom is when it has no missiles is?
A target.
Later versions of the Phantom had an elongated fuselage and a gatling type cannon built in, and subsequent fighters all had cannons or machineguns.
I don't doubt that from now on many air-to air encounters will happen "beyond visual range" and will involve very high tech, sophisticated "fire & forget" missiles of one type or another. But we ought not neglect dogfighting ability because when the high tech doesn't work right, or when our enemy learns to negate it, we'll pay when we forget the basics.
The F-22 is expensive but it's a better more capable plane than the F-35. The F-35 has been plagued by design alterations, development problems, and is WAY WAY overbudget compared to the F-22. It also will have two versions.

We won WW2 not because we had better "stuff" than our enemies. In fact, in many ways the German planes were better than ours. The German Messerschmits had fuel injection and could pull negative G's while our planes were carburated and could not. The Japanese Zero was not as well armored as our planes but was faster and more nimble. We won because we outproduced our enemies.
WW3 will be fought with what's on hand. That's why numbers are important, and it's why we needed that full original order of F-22 Raptors. Keep in mind outside of wartime losses, some of those F-22s will crash, and because we've closed down the production lines, those will not be replaced. We will not have 180 F-22s in the next big war we'll have 180-XX=?? F-22s.

Kevin Gibson said:
TommyGunn said:
The deficit's gone down but the national debt continues to rise. And Obama doesn't get credit for the diminishing deficit -- it actually resulted from the fact that the two parties couldn't agree on a budget and that knocked a bunch of spending out.
So if it were a Republican in office, you'd give him credit for reducing the deficit but if a Democrat is in office he doesn't get the credit…that's integrity. Not stumping for Obama, I'm just applying the same standards to both parties, something everyone ought to try on for size.
What did I say? Let's see: "it actually resulted from the fact that the two parties couldn't agree on a budget and that knocked a bunch of spending out." Seemed fairly even-handed to me.

Kevin Gibson said:
Regardless of which story you believe, he made the call, and he didn't take the chicken chit option.
OK, but he apparently wasn't ALLOWED to. He's the blind squirrel who stumbled upon an acorn.

Kevin Gibson said:
Since 1979 that is the ONLY sanctions that actually caused Iran to change their ways (not to the point of abandoning their nuke program, but they did back off some). The reality is, Iran will have a nuke whenever they decide to build one, and there's really nothing we can do about it. That ship sailed by about 2001. They were VERY smart in how they set things up.
See the part in red? That's where you undercut your own argument right there.

See the green part? That is where you are absolutly 100000000% correct, and why those sanctions were doomed.

Kevin Gibson said:
SERIOUSLY? A scandal where ultimately the system worked, and that's worse to you than losing our fundamental right to privacy?
"The system worked?"
That was a pretty damned serious scandal; IT ENDED A PRESIDENCY.
A crime commited by the president is effectively not just a crime commited against an opposing party, it is a crime against the American Peole themselves.
Did Bush lose his presidency? Has Obama? Is he likely to? I mean, I here chatterings amongst the nattering nabobs about impeachment -- but I don't see it happening. It will not work.
As far as our "privacy rights" are concerned we lost those under BJ Clinton when "echelon" was formed.

Kevin Gibson said:
Look if you're able to read between the lines you should be able to see that I'm NO Obama fan whatsoever. It's just that I don't see Republicans as a viable solution to the problem. On the things that REALLY matter, the two parties are in lock step. All those other things that differentiate the two parties are just Red Herrings to keep us focused on things other than the HUGE issues that are really destroying America.

Both parties are for big government
Both parties are for the incremental erosion of our civil rights
Both parties are against a "fair tax"
Both parties are NOT for a balanced budget
Both parties support the loss of our right to privacy
Both parties support corporate rights over the rights of the individual (SCOTUS decisions Citizens United and McCutcheon)
Both parties refuse to properly regulate Wall Street (meaning we will ALWAYS bail them out; every time)
Both parties support US intervention in every damn issue in this world that is none of our business.
Until republicans get a better chance to lead I with hold judgement on their willingness to balance the budget. I will admit I see little ambitions amongst the Rep. party in general for it, but it is hard to lead when you only control 1/3 of government.
"Both parties support corporate rights over the rights of the individual (SCOTUS decisions Citizens United and McCutcheon)" ~~ I was never sure why people lost their rights when they joined into a corporation myself. This matter seems most sharply brought out to me in the "Hobby Lobby" case where Obamacare was supposedly going to force the company to provide free abortofacient type birth control, and where the government side lost. While one may argue whether abortion is "murder" or not, or is or is not at that early stage of pregnancy (I with hold my comment) the owners believe it IS murder and were apparently going to be forced into a situation somewhat akin to being forced to purchase ammunition for a Mafia hitman.
So far as regulating Wall Street is concerned; I agree their idiot decisions should not result in a bail out; but I question the intellectual abilities of politiicians in general and the democrat party in particular to understand just what constitutes wise regulation and what doesn't. The role of the Cumminity Reinvestment Act in causing our most recent recession is ignored by most media and denied with great offended vigor by most liberals and democrats. I don't think the republicans know what the C.R.A. is.
If the libertarian party ever picks up steam, I might consider it.
Until then I will remain a republican.
Not because it's the party of the wise.
Just because IMHO Demorats are much much worse.
And I live to oppose them.:twisted::twisted::twisted::twisted:
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,118 Posts
I am a Civil Libertarian and feel that both parties SUCK!!

We currently need to take 2 of the 3 parts that comprise our Government and throw out ALL the trash so we can start anew with a complete overhaul of the Legislative AND Executive branches of Government.

there is not an incumbent that can look us in the eye and truthfully state "I have done a good job and DESERVE to be re-elected!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,116 Posts
Well, maybe a handful like Ted Cruz. Probably 10% or less of the 535, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,499 Posts
I am a Civil Libertarian and feel that both parties SUCK!!

We currently need to take 2 of the 3 parts that comprise our Government and throw out ALL the trash so we can start anew with a complete overhaul of the Legislative AND Executive branches of Government.

there is not an incumbent that can look us in the eye and truthfully state "I have done a good job and DESERVE to be re-elected!
Gee whiz Mike, I wish you wouldn't be so **&^% BASHFUL and TELL US WHAT YOU REALLY THINK!!!:rolleyes:

Seriously, there certainly is a lot of suckage going on in D.C. these days.

"Princes and governments are often far more dangerous than other elements of society." ~~ Niccolo Machiavelli.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,118 Posts
Gee whiz Mike, I wish you wouldn't be so **&^% BASHFUL and TELL US WHAT YOU REALLY THINK!!!:rolleyes:

Seriously, there certainly is a lot of suckage going on in D.C. these days.

"Princes and governments are often far more dangerous than other elements of society." ~~ Niccolo Machiavelli.
Tommy,

Anyone that knows me will tell you that bashful is something I will NEVER be accused of..... I was born/raised without a filter.... Case in point was 1964 (I was under 3).... My fathers best friend was running for congress, and President Lyndon Johnson came to Morgantown for a campaign stop. I was with my parents up by the stage and my mother had me in a blue sailor suit. President Johnson saw the "cute little kid" and stopped and shook my hand..... I screamed out in his face "Mommy, Mommy...his hand feels like an old leather boot!!!"... President Johnson laughed and moved on
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top