Take no prisoners......literally.....

[lal Naja]

I just do not understand LIBERALS. The brain must be wired differently for them. Their positions are hard to understand.

On God. The word cannot be associated with anything to do with government. It is frowned on vehemently when mentioned in the pledge or money. (I'm an atheist so I really don't care, but I'm trying to understand their morality.)

On Criminals in prison: They want the best environment for them and they do not object to religion in these government institutions.

On the death penalty: They oppose it with such vigor and determination. (My loving Grand father was murdered at the age of 86, beaten to death. The criminal walks free to this day. I would administer the death penalty if I could)

On GITMO: Liberals fight to see that all rights, religion, food & clothing associated with the dogma are provided for.

On Unborn babies: Abort them at any point in their development. They fight for this archaic thought process. I understand the need for aborting a life, But this is the 21 century and birth prevention is so easy, Maybe when you are liberal your morals allow you to screw anyone without consequence, And please don't bring up the rape and incest issues connected with abortion rights, Or it's a woman's right to choose (I've live in three countries and have visited over 190 cities in over 38 countries and know that there are too many people on this planet. So if YOU want to Abortion is not a moral issue with me.

And too much else to write about on this forum.

Just remember what you wish for, it may come true. And yes, STAND YOUR MORAL GROUND AND FINALLY LOOSE THE GROUND YOU STAND ON.

I just don't understand you.??????????????????????????????????????

[RAZOR]

Originally Posted by zrayr

you actually don't know what you are talking about.

US Liberals with first hand (war) experience:


George Washington
John Adams
Benjamin Franklin
Thomas Paine
Thomas Jefferson
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Theodore Roosevelt
Ulysses Grant
Abraham Lincoln
Andrew Jackson
James Madison
James Monroe
Sen Ted Kennedy
George McGovern ( WW II )
Sen. Jim Webb (Vietnam)
Sen. Chuck Robb (Vietnam)
Sen. Tom Harkins (Vietnam)
Senator Daniel Inouye ( WW II, awarded Congressional Medal of Honor)
Representative Jack Murtha
Representative Daniel K. Akaka (WW II )

and many others, past & present, including my own brother, now deceased, who was a Vietnam vet.

it's no coincidence that most of the returning Iraq vets who are running for Congress are running as Democrats.


Happy Thanksgiving

Z. Ray

George Washington a liberal? Held his own trials in camp for deserters and took them out and shot them. Was for limited government.

John Adams NEVER served one day of military duty. Was for limited government.

Thomas Paine said "at best government is a necessary evil" not exactly a liberal thought. Not the liberal mantra

Thomas Jefferson also radically against big government, in his writings of Virginia Constitution, after a person was found guilty of a capital crime, they were taken the next day and executed. Only exception was no executions on the Sunday.Jefferson's arch enemy was Alexander Hamilton who was the architect of our Government, and Jefferson thought Hamilton was ruining the fledgling nation with his thoughts of a centralized government. Not a liberal.

Benedict Arnold was also a veteran as Murtha is neither reserve respect for their others despicable behavior.

What these men stood for are considered Conservative Values today. In a different time and use of language they were liberal because they wanted freedom from King George who was the oppressor because he put himself above the law. Today we want freedom King Obama for the same reasons.

[RAZOR]

Originally Posted by zrayr

you actually don't know what you are talking about.

US Liberals with first hand (war) experience:


George Washington
John Adams
Benjamin Franklin
Thomas Paine
Thomas Jefferson
Franklin D. Roosevelt
Theodore Roosevelt
Ulysses Grant
Abraham Lincoln
Andrew Jackson
James Madison
James Monroe
Sen Ted Kennedy
George McGovern ( WW II )
Sen. Jim Webb (Vietnam)
Sen. Chuck Robb (Vietnam)
Sen. Tom Harkins (Vietnam)
Senator Daniel Inouye ( WW II, awarded Congressional Medal of Honor)
Representative Jack Murtha
Representative Daniel K. Akaka (WW II )

and many others, past & present, including my own brother, now deceased, who was a Vietnam vet.

it's no coincidence that most of the returning Iraq vets who are running for Congress are running as Democrats.


Happy Thanksgiving

Z. Ray

George Washington a liberal? Held his own trials in camp for deserters and took them out and shot them. Was for limited government.

John Adams NEVER served one day of military duty. Was for limited government.

Thomas Paine said "at best government is a necessary evil" not exactly a liberal thought. Not the liberal mantra

Thomas Jefferson also radically against big government, in his writings of Virginia Constitution, after a person was found guilty of a capital crime, they were taken the next day and executed. Only exception was no executions on the Sunday.Jefferson's arch enemy was Alexander Hamilton who was the architect of our Government, and Jefferson thought Hamilton was ruining the fledgling nation with his thoughts of a centralized government. Not a liberal.

Benedict Arnold was also a veteran as Murtha is neither reserve respect for their others despicable behavior.

What these men stood for are considered Conservative Values today. In a different time and use of language they were liberal because they wanted freedom from King George who was the oppressor because he put himself above the law. Today we want freedom King Obama for the same reasons.

[SPF2245]

I'd like to punch the SOB who leaked this story to the media. The end result is they (the SEALs) will be found "Not Guilty" due to no creditable witness or victim. But (!!!), these fine men's careers will never be the same after having their names thrown under the bus by this case. Someone should have listened to the story from our "victim", asked the SEALs their side of the story...and called it par for the course. But hey, I'm sure there are a lot of men overseas right now wondering if the next guy is worth keeping alive, 'cause taking him alive might result in the end of your career.

[zrayr]

it might be an education for some of you liberal haters to pick up a dictionary, if you own one, and see the actual definition liberal. in the meantime here is a good one:

A Liberal Definition by John F. Kennedy:

Acceptance Speech of the New York
Liberal Party Nomination

September 14, 1960

What do our opponents mean when they apply to us the label "Liberal?" If by "Liberal" they mean, as they want people to believe, someone who is soft in his policies abroad, who is against local government, and who is unconcerned with the taxpayer's dollar, then the record of this party and its members demonstrate that we are not that kind of "Liberal." But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

http://www.liberalparty.org/JFKLPAcceptance.html


happy thanksgiving to all

[zrayr]

Originally Posted by RAZOR

--------Thomas Jefferson also radically against big government, ---------.

liberals aren't for big government. We are for government that works.

Z.

[RAZOR]

Originally Posted by zrayr

liberals aren't for big government. We are for government that works.

Z.

Please inform Obama because it is clear he doesn't know.

[Excaliber]

Obama? I really appreciate the thoughtful consideration and many many meetings Obama has had over what to do about Afghanistan. Where a fool (or a conservative) might rush in, this thoughtful approach is a welcome "change". When some ask how is that working out for you? The answer is, really well, all things considered, glad to have a thinking man in office.

[blykins]

Ernie, what in this world do you think he's done that would prove that he's been thinking? I see no evidence of the sort.

I want nothing more than to see this poor excuse for a President impeached.

[Roscoe]

Charles Whitman served his country......

as did Lee Harvey Oswald...

Roscoe

[Excaliber]

Blynkins, as I mentioned above. His review of the Afghan war strategy is an example of careful deliberation and consultation the likes of which we have not seen in decades.

Your call for impeachment is completely unwarranted, from a legal standpoint. On what grounds would you build this case? Of course it's an understandable position from a frustrated radicalized ultra conservative hyperbole view point.

If Liberals are seen as chasing rainbows and unicorns, it leaves me wondering what conservatives are chasing? Something equally trivial and non-existant it would appear. Loch Ness monster perhaps? Big foot maybe?

[RAZOR]

Originally Posted by zrayr

liberals aren't for big government. We are for government that works.

Z.

You must live in Never Never land, because what you just said is far from reality. Every bit of change Obama has championed has had government as the answer. And BIG BIG government at that. No thinking person would agree with your statement.

Excaliber, The problem is that everything the big O has wanted to act upon is rush, rush, rush. Then he fires one General and hand picks another to give him advice, then when he gets the advice he sits on it for months. While our soldiers are at war. He should put every thing on the back burner and have non stop meeting to make his decision, which should have been made long ago.It makes him appear that his social engineering is much more important to him than the lives of our brave men and women.

[Excaliber]

Razor, how's that Big Foot cave you must live in working out for ya? Just North of Never Never land, rumor has it...

The economy was in full blown collapse when Obama took office. He MORE than "hit the ground running", he took action at a time when an immediate response was required to stablize the country.

Afghanistan has been mired down with no concise plan for the last eight years. Different circumstances, no immediate crisis, time to reflect. WHAT the heck are our goals? WHAT are we doing there? Palin's take on it: So the Afghan people can have a better life and more security, bless their hearts. Talk about chasing rainbows and unicorns! What a disaster had McC and the bunny been elected!

A business man (or a POTUS) has ADVISORS, they don't make the call or set the policy, they ADVISE, that's what they do.

[Tom Kirkham]

Thought provoking article on interrogation:

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200310/bowden

[Roscoe]

I would expect that from The Atlantic. Me? I would have pulled his Fockin fingernails out with pliers.....over the course of a week.....

Roscoe

[Don]

If your looking for a different analysis and opinion on political topics etc. , The Heritage Foundation:

" WHERE WE STAND "

" The Heritage Foundation is committed to building an America where freedom, opportunity, prosperity and civil society flourish. "


http://www.heritage.org/

[zrayr]

Originally Posted by Roscoe

I would expect that from The Atlantic. Me? I would have pulled his Fockin fingernails out with pliers.....over the course of a week.....

Roscoe

100 out of 100 professional interrogators will all tell you that torture or extreme violence will rarely achieve any desired result. The prisoner will tell the interrogators ANYTHING to end the torture. Whatever they think the interrogator wants to hear. You end up getting garbage, not intel.

Z.

[Jamo]

Blynkins, as I mentioned above. His review of the Afghan war strategy is an example of careful deliberation and consultation the likes of which we have not seen in decades.

Ernie...I know you don't have deer in Hawaii. Now that you're moving to Oregon, you'll be able to recognize that look when you shine your headlights on one.

[Excaliber]

Good post Tom, long but interesting read. I found this qoute, among many other worthy quotes to be enlightening.

The man noted in the quote, Mr. Hall, was a CIA interogater who used torture, not coercision, to ply his trade. He was bitter that he was held personally responsible and lost his job as a result of "tree huggers".

Hall sees the loss of his career as dramatic proof that the CIA sold out to the "tree huggers" two decades ago, and points with scorn to a directive from President Bill Clinton that effectively barred intelligence agents from doing business with unsavory characters. The full-scale U.S. retreat from the uglier side of espionage is well documented—but has, by all accounts, been sharply reversed in the aftermath of 9/11.

I have no sympathy for Mr. Hall, he should have lost his job! Bush/Cheney moving backward to utilize torture once again (just calling it like it is) was a setback for the USA. Now being corrected. We are either a civilized people, or were not. We either keep our promise to such things as the Geneva Convention, or we don't.

Coercion methods of getting people to talk appear to be incredibly effective, when done by a skilled interogater. Torture is the short cut and excuse for a less than skilled interogater.

Jamo, I see your point, like a deer in the headlights. Just my opinion, I don't see that look with Obama.

[Roscoe]

One point: After several attempts to get KSM, et al, to talk they waterboarded him. After that they couldn't shut him up.

Anyone hear of the ticking bomb scenario?

Roscoe