Translate this page

Re: Time to stop spectating [Letter, 8/21/14]


Thursday, August 28th, 2014
Issue 35, Volume 18.
You need Flash player 8+ and JavaScript enabled to view this video.


Contrary to the opinion of Greg Brush, President Obama is not standing idly by: he is actively pursuing a commonsense policy. That policy is premised on the position he has stated clearly: "…there’s no American military solution to the larger crisis there [Iraq]."

The larger crisis in Iraq, and the Middle-East in general, is generated by intense sectarian differences, so a diplomatic solution doesn’t appear possible either. President Obama’s policy is also based on the extremely expensive lesson we learned from the Bush cabal’s experiment in Iraq. Or at least we should have learned.

Meanwhile, President Obama and our legislature should be concerned about the sectarian strife here in our own country. Far right fundamentalists have gained control of the GOP. They are promoting disdain and distrust of federal government: at the same time they are sponsoring ideologically-based legislation to enshrine their religious beliefs into law.

Brush is correct in saying America is in decline: but not because of President Obama. The decline was initiated by Reagan, with his embrace of supply-side economics, and the decline has continued, accelerating exponentially under George Bush. The decline continues under Obama, thanks to our gridlocked Congress. Leave it to the GOP to hamstring the President, then criticize him for limping.

John H. Terrell


 

62 comments

Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #1 | Thursday, Aug 28, 2014 at 4:47 pm
If the president would pass or propose "common sense" policies, maybe gridlock would end.

Even liberals can't be that blind.
Comment Profile ImageJohn the Baptist
Comment #2 | Thursday, Aug 28, 2014 at 7:50 pm
Re: Comment #1:

Come on, Ray. The Tea Party House will never propose any commonsense legislation for President Obama to pass: they're too busy voting to revoke or defund ObamaCare. Neither will they allow any proposed legislation supporting the President's policies to come up for a vote.
Comment Profile ImageGreg B.
Comment #3 | Friday, Aug 29, 2014 at 11:10 am
John,
Refreshing that you took it a step further than just blaming Bush and take it all the way back to one of the greatest, Reagan. GOP could surely use a man like him now. The decline, after 6 years, is owned by Obama because he wants us to decline, plain and simple.
As for blaming Congress, over 300 bills sit on Harry Reid's desk, most with bipartisan approval. Check it out.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/08/01/do-nothing-congress-house-passed-more-than-350-bills-that-sit-on-harry-reids-desk-says-congresswoman/
Comment Profile ImageRay (the real one)
Comment #4 | Friday, Aug 29, 2014 at 5:12 pm
Jon:

Do you know how many (tea party) types are servingin Washington? MSNBC?
Comment Profile ImageFor a free America
Comment #5 | Saturday, Aug 30, 2014 at 9:17 am
John,
I know you will not be reading this in your newspapers, but chew on this story for a look at what the real news is saying about your guy.

http://www.examiner.com/article/cia-now-admits-that-president-obama-is-a-radical-islamic-enemy-of-america
Comment Profile ImageMike W
Comment #6 | Saturday, Aug 30, 2014 at 2:42 pm
Comment #3 .. It is not a matter of how many bills sit on Reids desk, What's important is what's in the bills and who did they really come from, because so many bills are written by corporate lawyers to promote corporate agenda. that's how so many of the most important regulations that protected us against big banks gambling with our money and making us pay it back when the lose it. They write bills to weaken Social Security and cleverly try to classify it as something it is not so they can later do away with it entirely. If I am not mistaken the Farm Bill the rethuglicans were pushing through congress some time ago had a get out of jail free card slipped in that would have made it illegal to sue Monsanto and any other corporation in the event any future activity by them is found to harm the environment livestock or people, and they had the unmitigated gall to add in past actions as well. Sort of like this one ~ http://www.alecexposed.org/w/images/a/af/3A8-Right_to_Farm_Act_Exposed.pdf

Comment #5 ~ Sir or madam, you are being influenced by a far right think tank that spreads Islamophobia .. "Today, a former CIA agent bluntly told the newspaper, World Net Daily, that America has switched sides in the war on terror under President Obama. Clare Lopez was willing to say what a few members of Congress have said in private, but declined to say on-the-record. Hello ? The War On Terror is as bogus as the War on Drugs and all the other War On's

Clare M. Lopez is the Vice President for Research and Analysis at the Center for Security Policy The Center for Security Policy was founded in 1988 Under Reagan, and states that it operates as a "non-profit, non-partisan organization committed to the time-tested philosophy of promoting international peace through American strength." (American Strength is the operative word here when you see who is on the board of trustees) The Center for American Progress calls CSP part of the "Islamophobia network," particularly under its founder and director Frank Gaffney.
Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. has been called one of the "key ideologues who are the nerve center of the Islamophobia network" and is founder and president of the Center for Security Policy, a non-profit think tank "funded mainly by U.S. DEFENSE CONTRACTORS, far-right foundations, and right-wing Zionists" And they call that bunch of war hawks a non profit organazation with arms contractors and manufacturers and

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Frank_Gaffney

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Security_Policy

“The conscious and intelligent manipulation of organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. ” Edward Bernays
Comment Profile ImageJohn the Baptist
Comment #7 | Saturday, Aug 30, 2014 at 5:03 pm
Re Comment #5:

Sorry, but the Examiner does not report real news. Neither does World Net Daily. The headline states: “EX-CIA employee ADMITS President Obama is a radical Islamic enemy of America.” Ms. Lopez is in no position to ADMIT any such thing about President Obama. She did make the statement, but for her own reason, as follows:

Clare M. Lopez a Senior Fellow at The Clarion Project. The Center for American Progress identified Clarion as an important member of the "Islamophobia network," an informal grouping of prominent foundations, scholars, and opinion-makers that spreads negative impressions about Islam and Muslims in the United States.” Clarion has received large contributions from its wealthy Israeli backers. See footnote 12 for Wikipedia’s “The Clarion Project” entry.
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageJohn the Baptist
Comment #8 | Saturday, Aug 30, 2014 at 8:02 pm
Re Comment #3:

You say the GOP could use a man like Reagan today. Well, you have Paul Ryan who is still hawking Reagan/Laffer’s discredited supply-side economics. And Rand Paul has teamed up with Art Laffer himself. Regarding Reagan: his implementation of supply-side did not create jobs; his massive deficit spending did. See: www.factcheck.org/2012/02/dueling-debt-deceptions/

No, President Obama doesn’t want the current decline. Krauthammer has a mantra: “Obama’s failed policies.” But Obama’s policies can’t be evaluated because they haven’t been implemented. If you’ll recall, during President Obama’s first year, when he had a supporting Congress, he was busy preventing a global economic meltdown. When he did propose a comprehensive jobs bill, the House dismembered it and threw most of it away. It didn’t get any better after that. And he was still saddled with the Bush-originated tax cuts for the wealthy, the costly wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and other problems too numerous to mention. So, President Obama does indeed possess it, he just doesn’t own it.

Seriously, you’re citing The Blaze? That’s right up there with World Net Daily and Breitbart. Try this instead: Google “PolitiFact: Is Harry Reid playing a stalling game with bills in Congress?” You’ll see that many of those bills are DOA, like repealing ObamaCare, gutting Dodd-Frank, and reducing pollution standards.
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #9 | Sunday, Aug 31, 2014 at 3:45 pm
Too much to comment on here - but a few notes:

To "For a Free America" - the article is reporting on an interview with disgruntled ex-CIA agent, as report in the right-wing rag World Net Daily - the Faux News of newspapers. Here's a quote, that shows how off base the article is:

the president and some of his top appointees, such as CIA Director John Brennan, who is believed to be a Muslim convert, “consistently seem to apologize for Islam, even in the face of such atrocities as the Foley beheading,”

Note that he accuses the CIA director of being a Muslim convert - just batguano crazy.

Reagan would never get the nomination today - way to liberal. Raised taxes, granted immunity, worked across the isle, he tripled the national debt, etc. The ideal of Reagan is a fantasy - the reality is he was a dud - who did much to ruin the economy.

The trouble with middle east is very complicated, and the real people who stand to lose to ISIS are Gulf States, who want to preserve their dictatorships. Bush knew nothing about what he was unleashing when he took Saddam out. He should have listened to the 1994 version of Dick Cheney:

Because if we'd gone to Baghdad we would have been all alone. There wouldn't have been anybody else with us. There would have been a U.S. occupation of Iraq. None of the Arab forces that were willing to fight with us in Kuwait were willing to invade Iraq. Once you got to Iraq and took it over, took down Saddam Hussein's government, then what are you going to put in its place? That's a very volatile part of the world, and if you take down the central government of Iraq, you could very easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off: part of it, the Syrians would like to have to the west, part of it - eastern Iraq - the Iranians would like to claim, they fought over it for eight years. In the north you've got the Kurds, and if the Kurds spin loose and join with the Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey. It's a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq. The other thing was casualties. Everyone was impressed with the fact we were able to do our job with as few casualties as we had. But for the 146 Americans killed in action, and for their families - it wasn't a cheap war. And the question for the president, in terms of whether or not we went on to Baghdad, took additional casualties in an effort to get Saddam Hussein, was how many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth? Our judgment was, not very many, and I think we got it right.
Comment Profile ImageObama's on vacation again
Comment #10 | Sunday, Aug 31, 2014 at 5:36 pm
John the B "Seriously, you’re citing The Blaze? That’s right up there with World Net Daily and Breitbart." Just like a liberal to cite his own news sources that are so far out there in socialism land that one needs a telescope to see them.
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageObama's on vacation again
Comment #11 | Sunday, Aug 31, 2014 at 6:15 pm
There are several things happening mostly accelerated by Obama's decision to blame the west and especially the US for colonialism and imperialism. The conflict created by the division of the world into nation-states at the Treaty of Versailles, the imposition of boundaries that for the most part don't make any sense and indeed were created by the colonial powers to divide and conquer - the separation of the Kurds into different nations was a classic example of the divide and conquer policy. It was driven mostly by historical awareness of the fear throughout Eurasia of the Kurds.

Yes, with respect to foreign affairs it appears that he (Obama) operates under the belief that the US has not been a force for good in the world. But underlying that is the internationalist world view that we know about. And underlying that it the utopian view that human nature is changeable and can be molded under the guidance of wise leaders so as to approach equal outcomes in all spheres in a world at peace. Government is the agent for doing this, including the determination and awarding of “rights.” There are no “natural rights” as proposed in the Declaration of Independence. But they do not perceive that the utopian dream is in fact what drove Fascism, Nazism, and Communism and its ultimate 100 million body count. There is no doubt in my mind that they (liberals) are following this same road.

In sum, Obama has hurt the fabric of this nation on an international scale and from within.
Comment Profile ImageJohn the Baptist
Comment #12 | Sunday, Aug 31, 2014 at 11:15 pm
Re Comment #11:

You say it appears that President Obama believes the US has not been a force for good in the world. Why should he believe otherwise? Did the US do good in the Iran Contra affair, in Korea, in Vietnam, in Laos, in Afghanistan, in Iraq, et al? I don’t think so. And our occasional humanitarian interventions hardly compensate for the carnage we have wrought.

You attribute the following to President Obama: “…the utopian view that human nature is changeable and can be molded under the guidance of wise leaders so as to approach equal outcomes in all spheres in a world at peace.” In fact, this was G. Bush’s position. He was going to provide Iraq with a democratic government, along with peace and freedom. To the contrary, President Obama, along with most rational people, realizes that freedom has to be earned, not granted. So, President Obama has committed to not putting anymore military personnel in harm’s way in pursuing Bush’s futile dream.

Concerning harm done by President Obama: Bush was the stereotype of “the Ugly American”. He had the lowest international approval rating of any first world country leader during his tenure. He was considered a buffoon by our allies and a trigger-happy buffoon by our enemies. President Obama restored America’s international prestige and confidence.

Since then, President Obama’s international approval rating has dropped for one reason: his drone program. Our allies disapprove of it on moral grounds; our enemies are in abject fear of it. I have reservations about it, but I understand why President Obama is pursuing it: no more boots on the ground.
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #13 | Monday, Sep 1, 2014 at 2:17 pm
Before his two-week trip to Martha’s Vineyard in August, Obama’s count was 125 full or partial days and Bush’s total at the same point in his presidency was 407.


“Truth comes as a conqueror only to those who have lost the art of receiving it as a friend.” - Tagore
Comment Profile Imageglobal joke
Comment #14 | Monday, Sep 1, 2014 at 7:28 pm
I would like to thank all you Obama supporters for helping him make America the disrespected laughing stock of the world. Why don't you press rewind on your tape recorders and hear all the bull he spewed during election about how wonderful things have been globally during his tenure. Laughable. The US is in the worst position possible and losing respect every day but you keep believing what you like. If you want to hear some truths, talk to service men and women who have served overseas during his presidency.
Comment Profile ImageJohn the Baptist
Comment #15 | Monday, Sep 1, 2014 at 8:55 pm
Re Comment #14:

When did military personnel ever not gripe? If you really want to know what people in other countries think about President Obama and America, you have to let them speak for themselves, not Fox News.

Here's a sampling of what they think:

From a Gallup poll, 10 April 2014:
“WASHINGTON, D.C. -- After hitting a low point at the end of President Barack Obama's first term, U.S. leadership ratings worldwide rallied in 2013 as he began his second. Median approval of U.S. leadership across 130 countries stood at 46% last year, up from Obama's first administration low of 41% in 2012.”

“While the U.S. government shutdown in October kept the president from making his trip to Asia in late 2013, the image of U.S. leadership may be benefiting from the administration's attempts to strengthen its alliances and trade partnerships throughout the Asia-Pacific region. In fact, the 45% median approval rating in Asia is the highest Gallup has measured in the region during either the Obama or the Bush administrations."
Google: “Global Image of U.S. Leadership Rebounds”
Comment Profile ImageKyle
Comment #16 | Monday, Sep 1, 2014 at 9:21 pm
Take comfort in knowing that for the last five years the country has been run by a guy who thought Joe Biden was smart.
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #17 | Tuesday, Sep 2, 2014 at 9:08 am
Yes comment #14, whatever you do, please do not watch FOX News, you must switch to MSNBC and get the real story on the state of our nation. I swear, if it weren't for FOX News I don't know how John the B, Jon Monday and Mike W would get through the day. They must watch it 24/7.

"when did military personnel ever not gripe" gosh John that is an extremely prejudicial statement, but I guess it is politically correct to make fun of our men and women in the armed forces, the ones who actually stand on that wall while people like you and I trade quips and barbs from the comfort of our own homes. Considering the VA scandal that is happening right now I would say that the military have a right to complain, wouldn't you? Oh, and by the way, that happened on President Obama's watch.

@Jon: "Reagan would never get the nomination today, way too liberal" you may be correct, however, John Kennedy would also never get the nomination today, way too conservative. As for Reagan and the economy, you seem to forget that under the Carter administration the economy was in the toilet.... make that the sewer. Reagan not only brought America out of economic decline, he restored our faith in this great country. Like Teddy Roosevelt, he spoke softly, but carried a big stick. The economy had some bumpy moments through the terms of Bush the first and Bill Clinton, but what ultimately brought it to its knees in 2008 was greed. Hedge fund managers, bankers, and a democrat controlled government that believed that everyone, whether they could afford it or not, deserved to buy a home. Eventually the house of cards came crashing down.

What we have now is another severe crisis brewing in the middle east and a president who hasn't got a clue what to do about it. He is playing golf while the world burns. He didn't even have the decency to stop his game long enough to attend the funeral of the first 3 star general killed in Afghanistan. I'm sure that doesn't bother either Jon, John or Mike, but it bothers me, and anyone else with any sense of decency. For the president not to attend was shameful.

"A mind all logic is like a knife all blade. It makes the hand bleed that uses it." - Tagore
Comment Profile ImageJohn the Baptist
Comment #18 | Tuesday, Sep 2, 2014 at 10:18 am
Re Comment #16:

And thank God it hasn't been McCain and his thoughts on Palin.
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageJohn the Baptist
Comment #19 | Tuesday, Sep 2, 2014 at 4:41 pm
Re Comment #17:

I can’t speak for Jon or Mike, but your conjecture regarding me is wildly off the mark. I don’t watch any television news. I recommend that others do the same. I start with HuffPo Politics, Business, Science and Technology, and Religion to see what’s newsworthy; I can then Google the headlines to see who’s reporting on them. For controversial topics I check with PolitiFact. I do this while listening to my favorite music on Pandora.

You say "when did military personnel ever not gripe" is an extremely prejudicial statement, No it’s not. It goes with the territory. In every military person’s tour, there are periods of waiting – periods filled with coffee and talk, with topics of sex, cars, sports, and politics. Nor are the military the only people who gripe. Just reading LTE’s, you’d think everyone believes they have a better handle on foreign policy than President Obama, or anyone else for that matter. I think an H.L. Mencken comment is applicable here: "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

The VA seems to be a systemic problem. Do you remember G. Bush’s encounter with it? The VA’s administration needs a thorough house cleaning. My heart goes out to those who have been harmed by the VA’s ineptitude.

As far as our military who have been in harm’s way are concerned, they have my utmost respect. And I am concerned for those who have been harmed. One charity I contribute to is the Paralyzed Veterans of America.

I’ll let Jon speak regarding Reagan, but I will reiterate; deficit spending, not Reaganomics, was the stimulus in restoring the economy.

Regarding the Great Recession, you say “Eventually the house of cards came crashing down.” I add “after seven years on Bush’s watch”.

You say we have a “…severe crisis brewing in the middle east and a president who hasn't got a clue what to do about it.” You’re wrong about President Obama. The problem is that there are too many clues. I refer you back to my Mencken quote.

Regarding Obama and General Greene’s funeral, you’re misinformed: see www.snopes.com/politics/military/greene.asp
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #20 | Tuesday, Sep 2, 2014 at 6:15 pm
To Pink - glad to see you're picking up on Hindu philosophy. Lot's to learn there. I certainly agree that logic is a very limited resource, when it comes to religion and God. But, here on earth, it's a rare and valuable resource, when combined with empathy and compassion.

It's not entirely up to date, but this chart gives a good indication where each president ranks - by historians and academics - not by popular vote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States

They divide all the presidents into 4 groups (quintiles), Bush II of course is in the bottom group, while Obama is in the second group. Of course, his 2nd term is not over. But, I'm willing to bet 10 years from now, he will be ranked much higher than Bush II.

The top 10 are as follows:

1. Lincoln (R)
2. FDR (D)
3. Washington (None - he thought political parties would ruin American - I tend to agree)
4. Jefferson (Republican-Democrat)
5. Teddy Roosevelt (R)
6. Woodrow Wilson (D)
7. Harry S. Truman (D)
8. tie - Dwight D. Eisenhower (R)
8. tie - Andrew Jackson (D)
9. James K. Polk (D)

Here are recent presidents:

11. JFK (D)
14. tie - LBJ (D)
32. Richard Nixon (R)
26. Gerald Ford (R)
27. Jimmy Carter (D)
17. Ronald Reagan (R)
22. tie - George H. W. Bush (R)
20. tie - Bill Clinton (D)
34. George W. Bush (R)
14. tie - Barack Obama (D)

The thing that Reagan fans don't realize is that he got out of the hyper-inflation by a massive increase in military spending. He ran up big deficits and tripled the national debt (neither Bush II or Obama come close to that record). That infusion of capital into the economy (stimulus), did nothing for infrastructure, but did help turn around the sluggish economy and higher interest rates brought down inflation. Historians also know that late in his second term he was just one step ahead of impeachment because of the Iran/Contra deals that he lied about and which were specially and clearly illegal. The only reason he wasn't impeached was he agreed to fire his senior staff (even though they were following his policies).


“Truth comes as a conqueror only to those who have lost the art of receiving it as a friend.” - Tagore
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #21 | Tuesday, Sep 2, 2014 at 7:07 pm
Just to clarify, I meant Reagan got the economy out of the dumps by massive spending, he got out of hyper-inflation by increasing interest rates.

In any case, people also forget that what hit our economy in the late 70s was the oil embargo by the Gulf States. Carter's efforts and empathizes to address the economic effects of the oil embargo was to push conservation, which would have served us well, making us much less reliant on Arab Oil.

Still a good goal - and we're almost there, except we keep exporting oil, instead of keeping it for ourselves - but International Energy Companies don't give a darn about the US, only bottom line.


“Truth comes as a conqueror only to those who have lost the art of receiving it as a friend.” - Tagore
Comment Profile ImageReally?
Comment #22 | Wednesday, Sep 3, 2014 at 6:31 am
So far, a diminished U.S. hasn't panned out into the dawning of the Age of Aquarius as it was supposed to have done huh Hippies. For someone that promoted the Arab spring as a wonderful happening B.O. sure looks foolish now. Not to mention he called ISIS the "JV" Not so much Barry. I guess decapitation is another form of "change".

The bedwetters have been running America rampant for quite some time now. America is a serious country. We have serious issues and we need serious people to deal with them. Americans are waiting, too. Instead of clarity, we get a condescending lecture from Obama about a messy world and social media.

I keep hoping each new speech will be the one where Obama finally breaks down and admits he has no idea what he’s doing.
Comment Profile Imagejon Monday
Comment #23 | Wednesday, Sep 3, 2014 at 9:07 am
To Really?

Don't hold your breath for that breakdown, don't want you to lose consciousness.

Obama has, in the eyes of historians and presidential experts, been in the top half of best presidents, as opposed to Bush II being in the bottom rank:

Recovered the economy - jobs still lagging from the Bush-created depression, but the economy itself is stronger than before Obama took office. The reason it hasn't filtered down too the working class is that the House Tea Party refuses to pass meaningful stimulus bills that help ordinary people, and only helped Wall Streeet, banks, and international businesses.

Obamacare will be considered the most effective revision of the US health care system since Medicare. Although it was just a step in the right direction, it helps put insurance companies in an honest position of actually paying for medical services, and not an outrageous cash cow for Wall Street. Too many details to mention all, but the highlights are:

Can't be refused or dropped because of pre-existing medical conditions.

Kids stay on policy until age 26 (after college and starting a career).

Free checkups and preventative care - will save Americans trillions in the long run.

Helps poor and working class afford insurance.

Limits profits on insurance companies - making sure that at least 80% of premiums go to healthcare. That leave 20% for the insurance company's profit, overhead, and operations. Medicare does that for 5%, which is why eventually we will have Medicare for all, as an option.

Killed the Cowboy attitude to world events, which dragged the US reputation down to ground level. If you look at Comment #15, you'll see how Obama is viewed by the world.

As I said above, I'm willing to bet (a good steak dinner at the Valley Fort steak house) that 10 years from now, Obama will be ranked in the top half of best presidents and Bush II will be in the bottom quarter. Anyone?
Comment Profile ImageReally?
Comment #24 | Wednesday, Sep 3, 2014 at 1:23 pm
I didn't have to wait long for your Savior....Obmama “We don’t have a strategy yet” to step in it again.

You are like the optimist who fell off the ten story building. About half way down someone asked him how he is doing, and the optimist replied "so far, so good".
Comment Profile ImageJon Mobday
Comment #25 | Wednesday, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:10 pm
To Really?

Take the bet? I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. A good steak dinner - 10 years from now (if we're both still alive).
Comment Profile ImageJohn the Baptist
Comment #26 | Wednesday, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:50 pm
Re Comment #24:

The Mid-East is the 3-body problem of foreign relations -- except with more bodies. There is no simple solution. There may be no complex solution.

Also my favorite H. L.Mencken quote is applicable here: "For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."
Comment Profile ImageTal
Comment #27 | Thursday, Sep 4, 2014 at 1:30 pm
Maybe this is just me, but if I were the President of the United States and there was a rampaging horde of maniacs cutting people’s heads off in the Middle East and threatening to spread that into Europe and heaven knows where else, I’d probably postpone all golf trips, fundraisers, vacations, and state dinners until, at the very least, I had some kind of coherent explainable strategy to deal with it. Then, once the plan was in action, I might do 9 on the course to relax a bit, having actually done my job and all.
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #28 | Thursday, Sep 4, 2014 at 3:36 pm
To JtB,

Here's part of why it's so complex, and why Obama is right to take time to gather an international coalition, that includes major European countries, Arab States (like Gulf War I, unlike Gulf War II), and others. The US should never get involved in a ground war in the middle east without the participation of those who live in the region - otherwise, we are seen as just taking sides in a sectarian war, specifically supporting Sunnis against the Shias.

Bush II went into Iraq unprepared and ignorant of what would happen (against all advise from those who knew what would happen, including his own State Department and the 1994 version of Dick Cheney - see above). Bush mindlessly uncorked sectarian hatred that had been bottled up for 100s of years, especially since Western Powers divided up the Middle East after WWI for their own benefit, ignoring natural and historic sectarian boundaries.

Before Gulf War II, there was a dynamic tension between Iraq, Iran, and Syria. To understand this, let's break down who is who:

Syria - a Shia dictator ruling a mostly Sunni population.

Iraq - a Sunni dictator (Saddam) ruling a mostly Shia popluation

Iran - Almost entirely Shia government and population ruled by a religious leader, supporting a government who follows his orders. It was leaning toward electing a more friendly president, until Bush label them as part of the "Axis of Evil", together with their bitter enemy Iraq. It made no sense to provoke them, and the only result was the election of a hard-liner, setting back normal relations for decades.

Gulf States - Considered moderate Sunnis, but actually were funding the radical Sunnis in Shia countries - who became ISIS.

Then Cowboy Bush II went into Iraq, the china shop, and started breaking things. He took out Saddam, but left in place a Shia government who wanted revenge on the Sunnis who had been repressing them.

Bush II signed the agreement to pull out when we did. Some conservatives said Obama should have stayed in there - but the government that Bush II installed was overtly Shia and allied with Iran, inviting simmering violence from Sunni insurgents.

After the Bush II War, Iran became much more of a hardliner, the US installed a Shia dictator, who systematically purged Sunnis from positions of power in the government and military, and rebel groups started forming - groups being funded by mostly Gulf States.

Here's where it gets complicated. We liked the Sunni insurgents when they fought against Iran and the ruling government in Syria. But, when Sunni ISIS went into Iraq and fought against Iraq's army, the army melted away, because they didn't want to be taking sides in the sectarian war. We cannot and should not fight other people's wars. Should have learned that in Vietnam.

Here's the overall point - it's not our fight. We should have never stepped foot in Iraq - and let Iraq, Iran, and Syria fight it out. If anyone should step in, it should be people in the region - mainly the well-armed Gulf States.

But, the Gulf States are Sunnis, and are reluctant to attack the rebels they've been supporting.

Rather than take on the sole responsibility for facing ISIS, Obama is gathering a true coalition to attack them.

I hope the Gulf States recognize what they've been funding - and finally stop funding terrorists. They really should be leading the fight.
Comment Profile ImageJohn the Baptist
Comment #29 | Thursday, Sep 4, 2014 at 5:34 pm
Re Comment #27:

President Obama is doing the right thing in taking the time necessary to develop a rational strategy for America's involvement in the Mid-East.

He realizes that working smarter, rather than harder, is the only viable approach to develop the strategy to address the complex problem that the Mid-East presents.

Or do you really want him to use the Bush strategy of "Ready, Fire, Aim!"?
Comment Profile ImageNeil ()
Comment #30 | Friday, Sep 5, 2014 at 3:41 am
If we want to fight religious crazies why go half way around the world? Don't we have enough already here at home? Just look at our local Republican office holders. S-C-A-R-Y!!
Comment Profile ImageReally?
Comment #31 | Friday, Sep 5, 2014 at 9:49 am
uhh..OK Neil. I get all of that. I bet that sounded smart, while it was rattling around your skull.

On another note, I see that the Obama Bobble head choir is in full attendance.

There is a lot you can argue about with regard to HOW things were, or should be done in Iraq, but that is far outside the scope of anything you "Armchair Clausewitz’s" would have anything useful to contribute - unless you were there, or one of you were a combat seasoned veteran, maybe I skipped over that.

Once you are involved in "regime change" you are committed to a long, large scale, expensive, difficult effort - or at least you are unwise to expect anything else. Once you have overthrown a government in a nation in the Persian Gulf, bordering Iran, with a majority Shia population that may be strongly influenced by the Iranian government, with a Kurdish population that may affect the internal situation in Turkey, and bordering the world's biggest petroleum resources, you can't stop halfway through. You must MANAGE it. You can't just throw up your hands and say, "uh…Let me be Clear…uh...Bush....Darn." As I recall, even Nixon didn't throw up his hands 6 years into his Presidency and say "this is LBJ’s fault" for everything that went down in Vietnam after 1968.

Blame Bush all you want, but you sound ignorant. One thing is crystal clear: Obama owns this. He was not able to broker a coalition government. That was his one JOB in 2010 to get the SOFA for IRAQ, and he failed EPICALLY. He threw away the victory, and now we are reaping the results of that failure. The concept of blow back must fly a mile above your heads.

This President and his administration hasn't proven itself any better at not creating their own messes or cleaning up any that were handed over as part of the job. Our Border, Libya, Iraq, Syria, Egypt all have deteriorated on Obama's watch. Situations in Iraq and Syria, and our Border are at critical mass SIX YEARS into Obama's Presidency. Where in the world has our diplomatic or security position improved? From East to West -- the South China Sea, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Israel, Gaza, Egypt, Libya, Ukraine, Poland, the Czech Republic, Germany, the Baltics, Africa, Central America, Canada, Mexico-- literally everywhere you look, the US is less trusted to lead and American citizens more endangered. If that is success to you, then you don't know much about history and human nature. If anything were Obama's fault, your whole child-like worldview would collapse. Obama owns this, all of it.

Given the preceding troubling scenario, would Obama's current governance be accurately described as "Effective"?
Comment Profile ImagePaul
Comment #32 | Friday, Sep 5, 2014 at 2:01 pm
Right Neil, these scary Republicans believe in freedom of speech, freedom of religion, human rights and less government involvement in our lives, and they won't chop your head off or have you shot for disagreeing with them. I guess that would be pretty crazy to someone like you.
Comment Profile ImageTo 32
Comment #33 | Saturday, Sep 6, 2014 at 8:59 am
Republicans don't believe in freedom of speech (unless speech = the ability to buy elections). Republicans don't believe in freedom of religion (unless you're a fundamentalist Christian). Republicans don't believe in human rights (unless human rights are measured by how much $$$ you have in your pocket). Republicans don't believe in less government in our lives (ask any woman trying to access reproductive choice or any gay couple trying to get married).
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #34 | Saturday, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:37 pm
@Comment #33: Right, sure, of course.... and ALL Democrats are Communists, athiests and ISIS supporters. Someday, when you grow up, maybe, just maybe you will understand that not everyone can be put into a box. I'm a Republican woman, who believes in birth control, I am a member of a committee on human rights, specifically we target the trafficing of women and children across borders for the sex trade. I can assure you, none of those we help have any $$$. I also have gay friends who attend a Baptist Church, where they are welcomed and loved, and I, myself am not considered a so called fundamentalist, I am a Catholic.... go figure.
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #35 | Saturday, Sep 6, 2014 at 2:37 pm
The so-called Republican Party consists of four main parts:

1 - Wall Street - types, Bankers, and the ultra wealthy.

2 - Tea Party Crazies - funded by above, but have gotten out of hand.

3 - Christian religious Fundamentalists.

4 - Old-line conservatives (like Goldwater - almost extinct now).

The problem for them is that there is very little common interest in the groups, but they pretend to tolerate each other's concerns to try and elect people who will do their bidding.

The #1 group just wants to suck as much money out of the government (through contracts and tax deductions), and have no interest in building infrastructure or helping out the middle class. They want to elect people like Romney to lower their already very low taxes (tax as a percentage of gross income). They push deregulation, for the sole purpose of not being held accountable for their actions.

#2 group doesn't really know what it wants. They pretend to want things as it was in the late 18th Century. But, the reality back then was that the upper class ruled even more than today. In order to vote, according to our original Constitution, you had to be a white, male, land-owner. The founders felt that unless you met all three qualifications, you didn't have a stake in the country. The Tea Party also want to repeal Obamacare (a Republican plan), but don't want to give up any of the major benefits (cognitive dissonance).

#3 group has always wanted to enforce a very tiny minority of Christian views (compared to the world), on the rest of us - no thank you. I think most Christian Fundamentalists who get involved with politics have very little to do with the words and teachings of Christ.

#4 group is almost dead - Goldwater didn't want a small government, he wanted an efficient government. He was for personal freedom, like gay rights, legal pot, and if the American people voted for socialist national healthcare, his job was to implement it in the most efficient way. We are, after all, a democracy.


“Truth comes as a conqueror only to those who have lost the art of receiving it as a friend.” - Tagore
Comment Profile ImageReally?
Comment #36 | Sunday, Sep 7, 2014 at 8:25 pm
What are your fingers babbling about Monday?

Once again, you have no idea what you're talking about. But hey, at least you're consistent. Your Smug derision and mindless bile about Republicans masquerading as "intellect" on display.

On the night of November 2nd, I would suggest you get a collection of your favorite condiments nearby, and not eat breakfast or lunch.

You're going to need both the appetite and the spices to help deal with the ample portions of crow the American Republican electorate is going to serve you.

You continually give me the impression of someone who just landed on planet Earth five minutes ago.
Comment Profile ImageNeil ()
Comment #37 | Monday, Sep 8, 2014 at 10:17 am
There are not 4 different types of Republicans. There's only 1 type. Hateful!
Comment Profile ImageJD
Comment #38 | Monday, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:26 pm
Having a difficult time dealing with reality vs. Fantasy Neil?

Disagreement=hate? That sounds pretty liberal to me.
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #39 | Monday, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:54 pm
To Really?,

I was hoping for some intellectual discourse on the composition of the Republican Party - what major sub-groups wind up pushing the agenda, and what that agenda actually is. More specifically, I wanted to point out the diversity within the groups, which make the party less than united, and unable to field an electable candidate for president.

Is there a group I left out, or do you dispute the descriptions of the groups I included?

While short-term gains may be realized in November, in the long run, the Republican Party will have to remake itself (like it proposed after the 2012 election), or become a third party.

I am not that concerned about the long run - as the demographics will take care of things naturally, to bring our country into the realm of all other industrialized nations.

Got any comments besides criticism? Facts, perhaps?

Still no takers about my bet. Where is the faith in your beliefs?


“Truth comes as a conqueror only to those who have lost the art of receiving it as a friend.” - Tagore
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #40 | Monday, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:12 pm
The only person commenting here who is "hateful" is Neil. The pablum of extreme liberalism, first brainwash the young.
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #41 | Monday, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:54 pm
To Pink,

There's no need for anyone, left or right, to be unpleasant here. It's just a good forum for exchanging views (actually I have little hope for that, but it does help me to do research and hone my arguments).

Extremeism is the enemy of the good, left or right (and I believe there are many times more extreme conservatives than liberals, otherwise we would have a left-leaning Tea Party-type movement.

Good to hear from you.


“Truth comes as a conqueror only to those who have lost the art of receiving it as a friend.” - Tagore
Comment Profile ImageMike W
Comment #42 | Monday, Sep 8, 2014 at 4:50 pm
Hi Neil, Now you see what happens when folks speak their mind, especially if what they say is true, you get Drill Sergeant Really in your face telling you you're ignorant and only he (Mr Ego) knows the truth "unless you were there, or were a combat seasoned veteran."
Drill sergeant Really blames Obama for "losing the war" He, being (having been) a career warrior, has no idea that those kinds of wars are not meant to be won because it was not a war.
But hey, every cloud has a silver lining, at least Sgt Really is starting to admit that it was, and is, all about regime change, which is not the same as war. Regime change is when you make up or manufacture excuses, using Hegel's dialectic and the media as a tool used to manipulate us into a frenzied circular pattern of thought and action. (they are coming for us, they hate us for our freedoms)

The only way to completely stop the privacy invasions, expanding domestic police powers, land grabs, insane wars against inanimate objects (and transient verbs), covert actions, and outright assaults on individual liberty, is to step outside the dialectic. This releases us from the limitations of controlled and guided thought used to invade a country for purely commercial reasons and forcefully remove a leader and replace him with one of our own puppets, willing to bend to our own economic and strategic interests rather than its own people. Why? Because you can do anything you want when you have the support of most powerful military and “combat seasoned” goons in the world.
The so called war was lost way before Obama came on the scene, the whole thing started to unravel soon after the invasion, when the Iraqi people, and the world realized it was an invasion, not the humanitarian effort or the liberation it was purported to be, when they saw bases being built faster than rebuilding infrastructure destroyed in the Shock and Awe television extravaganza. At any rate you just can't win a mistake, like two wrongs don't make a right but the "seasoned" ones and their insane foreign policy bosses are chomping at the bit to get back in there and screw it up even more while taking on Syria and now starting a war with Russia over yet more lies.

No matter the stated reasons, invading countries over lies, ousting their, often democratically, elected leaders and installing puppets who will privatize their resources into the hands of foreign commercial interests is wrong, immoral and illegal but what concerns me more than the criminality is the insanity. The desire to control others (individuals, markets, countries or the world) is a form of insanity, wanting or needing more than you can possibly use while discouraging just distribution to those who are in need is a form of insanity, feelings of superiority and an inability to feel empathy, compassion and even the remotest kinship for all others is a form of insanity. Obama, nor any other president solely dictates our foreign policies, that was privatized years ago into the hands of right wing neoconservative think tanks who are the ones obviously suffering from these various forms of insanity and everything that has been done thus far was planned by them years ago, and as we now know, they used 9/11 as a springboard for this plan.
Of course it has not worked, it is the greatest debacle the world has witnessed, it was wrong from the get go, there was no right about it and this same insanity will again sacrifice innocents in another false flag event, like the CIA assisted Boston Marathon bombing since it doesn't seem the ISIS, made for TV beheading's worked. The 9/11 anniversary is coming up in a few days so we'll see what else they may have planned to shock us into submission, to go along with their mad plan to dice up the middle east for easier control, make terrorist groups recruiting so much easier and basically allow them to kill off as many as they can to clear the way to more resources. All without a care in the world about the innocent souls lost, who wanted nothing more than to be allowed to raise their kids and live out their lives in peace in their own country.
The belief that 3000 guys no one ever heard of have a chance of conquering two billion people half a world away, unless we start yet another war is the same insane logic that was brought to us by our foreign policy nincompoops (Wolfowitz et al) who have either lied or been incorrect or both for over a decade.
Overall, it makes a lot of sense to remain cautious about what government says, especially in matters of war. Our recent track record has been poor.

"In order to rally people, governments need enemies. They want us to be afraid, to hate, so we will rally behind them. And if they do not have a real enemy, they will invent one in order to mobilize us": - Thich Nhat Hanh, Contemporary Vietnamese
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageMike W
Comment #43 | Monday, Sep 8, 2014 at 4:56 pm
“Modern capitalism has produced pathological symptoms and endorsed an ethos that is antithetical to life and to liberty. It is killing the world and foreclosing evolutionary possibilities.” Unk


Dear World,
Sorry for the constant wars and invasions based on lies.
Sorry for the false flag attacks. Sorry for overthrowing your government and replacing your leaders with our puppets.
Sorry for installing the Central Banks that indebted your people.
Our governments have been taken over by corporate interests, bankers and special interest groups, while our countries have been turned into police states. The people of the west are waking at an exponential rate however, so please bear with us as we attempt to take back our country.

Sincerely,
The West.
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #44 | Monday, Sep 8, 2014 at 5:07 pm
I said "extreme" liberalism Jon, not every liberal. If a right wing person were to make the same comment about all Democrats that Neil made about all Republicans, I as a thinking Republican woman, would have the guts to call him on it, why don't those of you to the left of center do the same? I do not know how old Neil is, but he is speaking like a ten year old (no offense).

By the way Jon, I beg to differ with you about conservatives being more extreme than liberals. What do you call the Occupy movement? At least Tea Party members do not urinate and deficate in public, or hurl obscenities and threats at passersby. I'd say that we both have our crosses to bear.
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #45 | Tuesday, Sep 9, 2014 at 8:21 am
Mikey: Nobody (with the possible exception of Jon) is going to read past the first line (the content of which, is of course ludicrous) of your latest rant. You never fail to amaze and amuse me. You are truly the 1% of liberals that I was referring to in comment 34. Thanks for the laugh.
Comment Profile ImageTerry Leather
Comment #46 | Tuesday, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:09 am
“Hey, kids, know what’s groovy? Watching Grandpa Propping up our failed, power-hungry president and babbling about Jewish NeoCons on the internet!”
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #47 | Tuesday, Sep 9, 2014 at 10:22 am
Hi Pink,

I didn't say "conservatives [are] more extreme than liberals", I said that I believe there are more extreme conservatives than extreme liberals, in the US.

Not since the Weather Underground has there been a violent extreme liberal movement (and that was less than a dozen people).

But, look at all the "militia" groups, white supremacists, anti-government military groups, who arm themselves for the "coming war" against [name your cause here]. No such thing on the left.

The cause could be against the "one-world government", race wars, the immigration invasion, or other imagined threats against them or our country.

Again, the number of extremists on the right, I believe, far outnumber the extremists on the left. If you want to pick on the tiny number of people who "urinate and deficate in public", I can point to the Westboro Baptist Church.

So far as "hurl obscenities and threats at passersb[ies]". Really?

You don't think that happens on the right?

At any rate - this forum works best when people keep a civil tone, present FACT based OPINION (and know the difference), present references (links to articles, polls, or other verifiable sources), and keep respect for people taking the time to post something that has a point of view, and is not just name calling and sarcasam.

To those who object to my analysis of the four types of Republicans, any intelligent push back? How do you see the party? What groups and what objectives do each group push?
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #48 | Tuesday, Sep 9, 2014 at 2:20 pm
I think you watch too many made for TV movies Jon. While there are certainly little pockets of people, who have moved to say, Idaho or Montana, for instance, I don't actually believe that any of them pose any serious threat to our government. That movement was pretty firmly contained at Ruby Ridge. If you want to talk about wacko fringe groups, how about the left leaning tree huggers who commit arson and plant devices in our wooded areas to kill and maim people. Then of course there is also the infamous "unibomber" he was a bit left of center as I recall. We could play this game all day, but you get my drift.

As for the fools in the Westboro Baptist Church, they are not conservatives, and they most certainly are not Christians. They picket the funerals of many members of our military who were killed in the line of duty. I don't believe that they take any political stand, either right or left, they are just a bunch of idiots following the wrong path. In fact it is conservatives who have stood in front of them at demonstrations in order to protect the families of the dead. God does not condone their antics, and neither do I.
Comment Profile ImageMike W
Comment #49 | Tuesday, Sep 9, 2014 at 5:18 pm
All anybody has to do is ask themselves who offers alternative views brings information (no matter how wacko) with websites and links to this venue, and who just stands on the sidelines making cleaver derogatory remarks about those who take the time to offer their views. Hmmm

"Free inquiry requires that we tolerate diversity of opinion and that we respect the right of individuals to express their beliefs, however unpopular they may be, without social or legal prohibition or fear of success." -- Paul Kurtz : "A Secular Humanist Declaration," in On The Barricades, 1989

"This is, in theory, still a free country, but our politically correct, censorious times are such that many of us tremble to give vent to perfectly acceptable views for fear of condemnation. Freedom of speech is thereby imperiled, big questions go undebated, and great lies become accepted, unequivocally as great truths." -- Simon Heffer Daily Mail, 7 June 2000

Don't worry about the haters... they're just angry because the truth you speak contradicts the lie they live. Dr Steve Maraboli

PS.. "I think you watch too many made for TV movies" ??? What does that mean?
Comment Profile ImageBonsallGayGuy
Comment #50 | Tuesday, Sep 9, 2014 at 7:48 pm
Regarding comment #48. Pink, you're leaving out a critical point. Westboro Baptist Church pickets the funerals of US servicemen (both gay and straight) based on their belief that God has abandoned the United States because of its growing acceptance of gay men and women. This is the crux of their philosophy and core purpose of their movement. At the top of each page of their website there appears in big bold letters "God Hates Fags". Even their web address (http://www.godhatesfags.com) makes this perfectly clear. Westboro Baptist Church is an anti-gay hate group. Anti-gay hate and animus is the basis of their existence.

Unfortunately this is not a point of view confined to just extremist groups on the fringe of society. This opinion is echoed by numerous so-called mainstream religious leaders and politicians throughout this country, particularly those associated with the GOP.
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #51 | Wednesday, Sep 10, 2014 at 8:34 am
@BGG: Westboro Baptist Church (although I use the term church loosely) is an equal opportunity hate group. While I believe that the term "hater" has been way overused in our society, it is obvious that when applied to this group of evil doers, it fits like a glove. I love seeing the sign that was recently erected in their hometown in Kansas that says "GOD LOVES GAYS". While the sign may have been meant to be tongue in cheek, it is still quite true. God loves all of us, it is up to each individual person however to make his or her own peace with God. His arms are wide open. It is interesting to note that while all the world's major religions have a taboo against being homosexual, only one religious group uses death as a punishment, and that is radical Islam.

I believe that we have digressed from the original topic, which had something to do with radical fringe groups. It is my opinion that both the right and the left are guilty of having them, I just admit it. A good example of the radical left is comment #49.

I'm guessing you do not have a TV Mikey. I don't like them much either, but there are a few cable channels who love to show what they term "made for tv movies" they are usually about serial killers, stalkers, young love, and radical fringe groups who move to the hills in order to form right wing terrorist cells.

It's hot out there. Stay cool.
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #52 | Wednesday, Sep 10, 2014 at 3:55 pm
Hi Pink,

I'm afraid I have to call you on this. There is no comparison between left and right militant numbers or groups.

Yes, there are radicals on both sides, but in terms of armed, militant, and actually murders, the radical right takes the prize.

If you want, I can list both the number of people in these hate groups, left and right, but I hope you will concede that it's not even close. Just think:

KKK
Militias
White Supremacists
Violent anti-abortion groups
Violent anti-gay groups

Has there been any equivalent on the left to compare to the OK City bombing, etc.

If you disagree, I'll do the research to post the actual numbers - this has been seriously studied.

Let me know - and if you disagree, please post how many radical left groups openly advocate violence and how many deaths they have caused. OK?

Best,

Jon
Comment Profile ImagePink
Comment #53 | Wednesday, Sep 10, 2014 at 4:34 pm
I don't doubt for a minute that you would love to do the math Jon, and collecting facts and figures, seems to be pretty much your favorite pastime, but lets start with the infamous KKK. Yes they are creepy crawly individuals, but at their prime, the 1920s through the 1960s, they considered themselves to be members of the Democratic party. Fortunately for all of us they have pretty much died out. Same for the idiot "white supremacists" they also considered themselves Democrats. These groups were NEVER endorsed by the Republican party. One of the main reasons I chose to become a Republican was an uncle of mine by marriage, thank God not actually a relative, was a member of the KKK, a white supremacist, and the chairman of the Biloxi Mississippi Democratic caucus. That particular group also did not allow women. I despised the ground he walked on. So did my parents.

I believe that we have already covered militia groups. Ruby Ridge took place during the presidential term of Bush I. Again, never endorsed by the Republican party. As for OK City, that was two guys, disgruntled ex military, with an axe to grind. Not exactly a huge group.

Violent anti abortion groups: While most abortion protestors were peaceful, the ones who bombed clinics were sick individuals, and I will certainly concede that they were extreme right wing. Same with anti gay groups. The things they did were indeed a shameful part of American history.

Equivalent groups of the left: The Weathermen, the Black Panthers (who murdered people simply because they were white) all the underground splinter groups of the late 60s and early 70s. Remember the Patty Hurst debacle? The groups most certainly advocated violence and caused deaths.

Once again, the Uni-bomber, and of course the tree huggers, who burn down buildings and set traps. Rather cowardly wouldn't you say?

If you want to argue semantics Jon, that is fine with me. My point is that there are crazies on both sides of the line. I do find it interesting, how when you are questioned about a premise that you make, you tend to bristle and get testy. I have no intention of playing show me yours and I'll show you mine. The facts speak for themselves.
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #54 | Wednesday, Sep 10, 2014 at 6:38 pm
Pink - you're right about the WBC - they're just crazy, and I found that most of the members are extended family of the founder. Right and left wing groups have denounced them.
Comment Continued : The comment above was written from the same location.
Post Continued
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #55 | Thursday, Sep 11, 2014 at 10:55 am
Pink,

You bring up violent groups on the left from the 60s and 70s - but they have died out and were very tiny to begin with. They hated Dems as much as Reps. In a sense, they were apolitical, like many of today's right wing hate groups, as they don't want to create change within the US political system, they want to overthrow it - of course, making them traitors.

But, today, the number of right wing violent groups and the number people in those groups far outnumber the equivalent on the left. I do have some personal insight, as my step-brother is one of them in Montana.

Like many on the far right, who have dropped out of society, it doesn't keep him from applying for food stamps and other assistance from the government. Just pure hypocrisy.

My guess is that the numbers would turn out to be at least 100 to 1, if not 1,000 to 1.
Comment Profile ImageMike W
Comment #56 | Thursday, Sep 11, 2014 at 11:58 am
If it wasn't for a rather large portion of our society, especially the overly religious, and or patriotic who think it is a sin to change their established beliefs about their country, its history, and the rest of the world, no matter how factual the evidence to the contrary because they are instinctually aware that if they do, it could cause a cascading effect on many if not all their other long held erroneous beliefs.
A change in ones perspective, in most cases, should be celebrated not feared yet some will fight tooth and nail to protect their own ignorance.

Now because of a handful of ideologues in Washington we’re back to square one, we have nuclear war staring us in the face and a new cold war starting all over again. My whole childhood and the first half of my life took place during the “Cold War” and daily threat of nuclear annihilation, I certainly don’t want my granddaughter to have to go through that. Why should anybody?
After all, China doesn’t want war, the Russians don’t want war, (see supplied videos) they are being goaded into war over trickery and lies, Washington has gone back on its promise to Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union, not to amass troupes and weapons of war on their borders, today we have plans to do so via the Ukraine joining NATO, all based on lies and conjecture.
Nobody wants war except that handful of Bush era neocons in the White House, this
idiocy exists nowhere else in the world, except for one small group in one other country in he middle east.
Only the United States maintains a thousand or more manned military bases around the world (800 since 9/11/01 and one must ask why, if not for war, if not to maintain unfair advantage over others like having the dollar be the world currency and western business monopolies reign over all other countries and their resources. They are doing it here as well where all the commons that rightfully belong to each and every one of us have been taken over by private companies who are gorging themselves on our finite resources for personal gain, at the same time trashing the environment while we are too busy watching Dancing with the Stars.

What kind of intellect wants complete physical and financial control over all others?
What kind of intellect besides those mentally imbalanced individuals and their insane ideology believes they, and therefore the United States, are somehow divinely chosen to rule over all others while the American people want what only what the rest of the world wants, to be left in peace without being dominate by anyone, self determination, to be an equal and valued partner with the rest of the world. Only then can we set about to fix the economy, poverty, disease and the climate.

Cast a critical eye and you will see that only those few within the White House and Israeli governments start wars based on outright lies, these ideologues with their psychopathic beliefs that they and this country, are chosen above all others need to be routed out before they bring nuclear annihilation to us all and it is up to everyone of us here and in Israel to find a way to peacefully bring this about.
I hope and pray we’re up to the task. If not, we will surely join the hundreds of other biologic critters going extinct every day due to pollution and destruction of habitat.

All wars are Banker Wars… This one is no exception

I believe, if we truly want to be objective we should listen to all sides with an open mind. Every day we hear what those within our government have to say via our corporate owned monopolistic media, please have a listen what others have to say and then discuss it here and with family and friends as if your life and livelihood depend on it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUOXgv8k0R4#t=25
Why America Needs Another War in Europe

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1onYuzeS0Lc
Interview with Sergei Glaziev - Advisor to President Putin

The 9/11 lie has persisted for 13 years. Millions of Muslims have paid for this lie with their lives, the destruction of their families, and with their dislocation. Most Americans remain comfortable with the fact that their government has destroyed in whole or part seven countries based on a lie Washington told to cover up an inside job that launched the crazed neoconservatives’ drive for Washington’s World Empire. http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/09/10/911-13-years-paul-craig-roberts/
- World War 3 – All very good but starts getting to it at 50:00 min to the end. (last 5 min)
Comment Profile ImageJD
Comment #57 | Thursday, Sep 11, 2014 at 1:56 pm
It’s actually pretty scary how a hateful, racist right-winger lives in every left-winger’s head...

Right wingers causing the Violence? I think not

Nidal Hasan – Ft Hood Shooter- Registered Democrat and Muslim.

Aaron Alexis- Navy Yard shooter – liberal/Obama voter

Seung-Hui Cho – Virginia Tech shooter: Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff, registered Democrat.

James Holmes – the “Dark Knight”Colorado shooter: Registered Democrat, staff worker on the Obama campaign, #Occu-py guy,progressive liberal, hated Christians.

Andrew J. Stack-flew plane into IRS building in Texas – Leftist Democrat

James J. Lee-Was the “green activist” leftist took hostages at Discovery Channel – progressive liberal Democrat.

Jared Loughner-the Tucson shooter – Leftist, Marxist

Ohio bomb plot derps were occupy Wall St leftists

Harris and Klebold, the Columbine Shooters – families registered Democrats and progressive Leftists.

Facts are not liberals' strong suit. Rhetoric is.
Comment Profile ImageMike W
Comment #58 | Thursday, Sep 11, 2014 at 2:47 pm
PS Sure wish some here had it together half as much as this young man and his art.

" The world is coming to an end and the path to a new beginning starts within YOU"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DL079pfYzM8
Comment Profile ImageJon Monday
Comment #59 | Thursday, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:02 pm
To JD,

You've listed a few individual, whose acts of violence had nothing to do with politics - just crazy people.

One right-wing nut killed many more people than those you listed: Timothy McVeigh

He was part of a movement - as are thousands of other right-wing hate groups, with thousands of members, who have killed or advocate killing: [insert your choice here: Jews, Hispanics, blacks, law enforcement officers, etc.]


“Truth comes as a conqueror only to those who have lost the art of receiving it as a friend.” - Tagore
Comment Profile ImageTerry Leather
Comment #60 | Friday, Sep 12, 2014 at 8:14 am
This looks like a job for….DEEPLY CONCERNED MAN

Hey Mikey, If you're looking for a place to hold a sadness pageant, the building I work in has a conference room.
Comment Profile ImageMike W
Comment #61 | Friday, Sep 12, 2014 at 11:06 am
I will be happy to engage you when you decide to actually say something about the issues instead of trying to be cute. Although I do understand that in today's world of cutthroat economics and the wars they use to gain funds and take over countries and enslave their people through debt, these childish attempts to put down those who actually care by those who can't, won't or don't know how, is completely understandable.

Though I truly believe compassion, empathy and the ability to care for others is hardwired into every one of us at birth, through the help of well meaning parents, our peers, the media and various institutions, these attributes, like muscles, will soon atrophy and become useless through non use. As a result, all these great attributes must be remembered or relearned, remembering is much preferable to relearning because the latter requires the written word and various, often confusing, religious interpretations...
Comment Profile ImageTerry Leather
Comment #62 | Friday, Sep 12, 2014 at 12:59 pm
Thousands spared by war in the middle east as aging hippies post reminders to "stay safe during these scary times." #ISISBeNice

Article Comments are contributed by our readers, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Fallbrook Village News staff. The name listed as the author for comments cannot be verified; Comment authors are not guaranteed to be who they claim they are.

 

Add your Comment


Name

Images, Formatting, or HTML is not allowed : plain text only. You may post up to 5 website addresses within your comment.




Disclaimer

The Fallbrook Village News has tightened its' policy regarding comments.
While we invite you to contribute your opinions and thoughts, we request that you refrain from using vulgar or obscene words and post only comments that directly pertain to the specific topic of the story or article.
Comments that are derogatory in nature have a high likelihood for editing or non-approval if they carry the possibility of being libelous.
The comment system is not intended as a forum for individuals or groups to air personal grievances against other individuals or groups.
Please, no advertising or trolling.
In posting a comment for consideration, users understand that their posts may be edited as necessary to meet system parameters, or the post may not be approved at all. By submitting a comment, you agree to all the rules and guidelines described here.
Most comments are approved or disregarded within one business day.

RSS FeedFacebookTwitter



Advertisement for Stellar Solar





Subscribe




Most Commented


Reach Local Customers



The Fallbrook Village News The Fallbrook Village News
760-723-7319 - 1588 S. Mission Rd. Suite 200, Fallbrook CA 92028
All contents copyright ©2014
About Us
Earthquake Information
Business Listings
Contact Us
Letter to the Editor
Report a website error
Sitemap
Online Digital Edition
RSS Feeds
Login