The Enemy is at Home [Video]

[Shapecity]

[video=youtube;GNvQD83WRCg]

 

[deception]

agree with this courageous soldier's sentiment, however, the editors of this clip need to realize that president obama ended the war in iraq and he voted against it in the first place. remember when mccain promised to have US servicemen in iraq in perpetuity on the campaign trail? thats the difference between the republicans and democrats- republicans have an utter disregard for the humanity of others because they believe they have a god given prerogative to do as they wish (i.e manifest destiny), while democrats are sensible enough to realize that empire is an antiquated notion.

 

[RipCity]

agree with this courageous soldier's sentiment, however, the editors of this clip need to realize that president obama ended the war in iraq and he voted against it in the first place. remember when mccain promised to have US servicemen in iraq in perpetuity on the campaign trail? that's the difference between the republicans and democrats- republicans have an utter disregard for the humanity of others because they believe they have a god given prerogative to do as they wish (i.e manifest destiny), while democrats are sensible enough to realize that empire is an antiquated notion.

Obama didn't end the war in Iraq, the war in Iraq is far from over. Our soldiers are still fighting, people are still dieing, and no amount of political bullshit can hide that fact. McCain did make the statement that he planned to have our soldiers in Iraq for quite some time. Obama promised to have our troops out of Iraq in 16 months. The difference is McCain was being realistic, Obama was telling you what you wanted to hear.

As a side note I'd also like to enlighten you to the fact that Nazis, Communists and Socialists are all groups that land Left-of-Center, and are some of the biggest abusers ever of Human Rights and coincidentally also groups who have tried to build empires and take over the world. Food for thought?

 

[Denny Crane]

Obama didn't end the war in Iraq, the war in Iraq is far from over. Our soldiers are still fighting, people are still dieing, and no amount of political bullshit can hide that fact. McCain did make the statement that he planned to have our soldiers in Iraq for quite some time. Obama promised to have our troops out of Iraq in 16 months. The difference is McCain was being realistic, Obama was telling you what you wanted to hear.

As a side note I'd also like to enlighten you to the fact that Nazis, Communists and Socialists are all groups that land Left-of-Center, and are some of the biggest abusers ever of Human Rights and coincidentally also groups who have tried to build empires and take over the world. Food for thought?

For the record, about 50M people died in WW II.

At least 50M died in each of the USSR and China under communist rule.

 

[deception]

Obama didn't end the war in Iraq, the war in Iraq is far from over. Our soldiers are still fighting, people are still dieing, and no amount of political bullshit can hide that fact. McCain did make the statement that he planned to have our soldiers in Iraq for quite some time. Obama promised to have our troops out of Iraq in 16 months. The difference is McCain was being realistic, Obama was telling you what you wanted to hear.

As a side note I'd also like to enlighten you to the fact that Nazis, Communists and Socialists are all groups that land Left-of-Center, and are some of the biggest abusers ever of Human Rights and coincidentally also groups who have tried to build empires and take over the world. Food for thought?

in regards to your first paragraph- the president set a "timeline" for withdrawal and permitted the indigenous (iraqi) forces to take over most, if not all of the major combat fighting. to that end, american forces have been isolated into parts of the country where they are needed most. consequently, many of the career jihadists have gone home or to afghanistan because im assuming its haram (not permitted) to kill other muslims. conversely, mccain wanted to be in iraq in perpetuity kinda like korea or something, thats just foolish.

i dont how the your second paragraph is germane to the discussion at all, it just seems like a tangent thats based in complete falsehoods and misunderstandings of history. let me address a few: to suggest that the nazi's were left leaning is laughably absurd. do u know who the nazi's clampdown on before the jews, homosexuals and gypsies in germany? the communists.

the thing about history is that its a lot more nuanced than u might think; in other words- there are no fox news absolutes of black and white. lets take mussolini (a fascist) for example: before he invaded ethiopia and irked the west into confrontation- he was universally admired by western europe, america and canada. it was said, "that he made the trains arrive on time" and that was an accomplishment in italy which was backward and lagged behind the rest of europe. another example would be the murderous regimes of pol pot and mao (both communists) who were supported by the americans (thanks to kissinger) to do their bidding in south east asia against the soviets.

 

[deception]

For the record, about 50M people died in WW II.

At least 50M died in each of the USSR and China under communist rule.

stalin was responsible for most of those deaths. i dont know about the china number because its still a very secretive society. the soviets numbers came out in the 80's after perestroika.

 

[RipCity]

in regards to your first paragraph- the president set a "timeline" for withdrawal and permitted the indigenous (iraqi) forces to take over most, if not all of the major combat fighting. to that end, american forces have been isolated into parts of the country where they are needed most. consequently, many of the career jihadists have gone home or to afghanistan because im assuming its haram (not permitted) to kill other muslims. conversely, mccain wanted to be in iraq in perpetuity kinda like korea or something, thats just foolish.

So your saying all these Jihadists stopped fighting because they could not engage coalition forces without harming other Muslims? Oh, so what, the thousands upon thousands of Muslims who have been murdered by IED's and Homicide bombers just don't count? It wasn't against their religion to kill all those people, but it is now? McCain recognized the fact that no amount of political grandstanding about bringing our troops home so quickly was going to translate into reality, it is not foolish to be realistic and to allow yourself options in case things don't goes as planned.

i dont how the your second paragraph is germane to the discussion at all, it just seems like a tangent that's based in complete falsehoods and misunderstandings of history. let me address a few: to suggest that the nazi's were left leaning is laughably absurd. do u know who the Nazi's clampdown on before the jews, homosexuals and gypsies in germany? the communists.

the thing about history is that its a lot more nuanced than u might think; in other words- there are no fox news absolutes of black and white. lets take mussolini (a fascist) for example: before he invaded ethiopia and irked the west into confrontation- he was universally admired by western europe, america and canada. it was said, "that he made the trains arrive on time" and that was an accomplishment in italy which was backward and lagged behind the rest of europe. another example would be the murderous regimes of pol pot and mao (both communists) who were supported by the americans (thanks to kissinger) to do their bidding in south east asia against the soviets.

What I gather from this is that you really don't know much about history. It's pretty clear you know enough to be able to reference it conversationally to create the illusion of intelligence, sadly for anybody who knows what they are talking about you fail miserably.

As for your total lack of knowledge regarding systems of governance and where they lie in the political spectrum, I feel this video will go a little farther than my own words:Click

 

[deception]

So your saying all these Jihadists stopped fighting because they could not engage coalition forces without harming other Muslims? Oh, so what, the thousands upon thousands of Muslims who have been murdered by IED's and Homicide bombers just don't count? It wasn't against their religion to kill all those people, but it is now? McCain recognized the fact that no amount of political grandstanding about bringing our troops home so quickly was going to translate into reality, it is not foolish to be realistic and to allow yourself options in case things don't goes as planned.



What I gather from this is that you really don't know much about history. It's pretty clear you know enough to be able to reference it conversationally to create the illusion of intelligence, sadly for anybody who knows what they are talking about you fail miserably.

As for your total lack of knowledge regarding systems of governance and where they lie in the political spectrum, I feel this video will go a little farther than my own words:Click

u referred to the nazi's as left leaning- nuff said. stick to quirky facts about palin, your backyard meth lab and your pat boone greatest hits listening cause thats what u do best and stay out of grown up discussions.

btw, iraq is engaged in a civil war- sunni, shite, and kurd despise one another and all factions want a seat at the table and are willing to fight for the best seats. nevertheless, the foreign fighters (jihadists) have gone home in large numbers or followed the americans to afghanistan as well as pakistan, thats irrefutable.

 

[RipCity]

u referred to the nazi's as left leaning- nuff said. stick to quirky facts about palin, your backyard meth lab and your pat boone greatest hits listening cause thats what u do best and stay out of grown up discussions.

btw, iraq is engaged in a civil war- sunni, shite, and kurd despise one another and all factions want a seat at the table and are willing to fight for the best seats. nevertheless, the foreign fighters (jihadists) have gone home in large numbers or followed the americans to afghanistan as well as pakistan, thats irrefutable.

I am trying to have a grown up conversation, you apparently are very ill equipped for it and instead just attempt to insult me. It's funny you preach all this garbage about diversity and being open minded, yet apparently that doesn't apply to Rednecks eh? I'd also like to point out for the millionth time that I am not a redneck at all.

Iraq has been engaged in civil war ever since Saddam was overthrown, this is nothing new. The Jihadists haven't really gone home in large numbers and there are still IED's going off quite frequently. It is refutable. I'm sorry but your Messiah didn't wave the magic wand and fix all of Iraq's problems.

 

[deception]

Iraq has been engaged in civil war ever since Saddam was overthrown, this is nothing new. The Jihadists haven't really gone home in large numbers and there are still IED's going off quite frequently. It is refutable. I'm sorry but your Messiah didn't wave the magic wand and fix all of Iraq's problems.

u were probably looking for "irrefutable" but anyways. fyi- my messiah are girls with no standards. btw, the civil war accounts for the violence. furthermore, one of the reasons why the surge worked is that the americans brokered deals with many of the warring parties like sadr's nutjobs to buy the peace. and i can assure u that many of the jihadists have gone home because killing iraqi's isnt as alluring (or heaven worthy) as killing americans or jews.

 

[RipCity]

u were probably looking for "irrefutable" but anyways. fyi- my messiah are girls with no standards. btw, the civil war accounts for the violence. furthermore, one of the reasons why the surge worked is that the americans brokered deals with many of the warring parties like sadr's nutjobs to buy the peace. and i can assure u that many of the jihadists have gone home because killing iraqi's isnt as alluring (or heaven worthy) as killing americans or jews.

Adjective
Refutable (not comparable)

1. Able to be refuted, or shown to be false.

Source

 

[MikeDC]

i dont how the your second paragraph is germane to the discussion at all, it just seems like a tangent thats based in complete falsehoods and misunderstandings of history. let me address a few: to suggest that the nazi's were left leaning is laughably absurd. do u know who the nazi's clampdown on before the jews, homosexuals and gypsies in germany? the communists.

You know who the communists cracked down on before they cracked down on jews, homosexuals and gypsies in the Soviet Union? Other communists.

Do you know what the communists called themselves? Socialists.
Do you know what the nazis called themselves? Socialists.

 

[deception]

You know who the communists cracked down on before they cracked down on jews, homosexuals and gypsies in the Soviet Union? Other communists.

Do you know what the communists called themselves? Socialists.
Do you know what the nazis called themselves? Socialists.

we can go back and forth about the extremes of facism or communism but its an endless and pointless debate. here are the facts- the nazi's were nationalistic fascists whose rallying cry is eerily similar to the separatists in quebec; pat buchanan's non-sense and the bnp in england as well as other nascent ultra ring wing parties in europe. president obama and the democrats are nothing like these ppl.

as for the massacres committed by communists in the ussr- most of them were committed under stalin's personal reign of despotism. the other big communist murderers were pol pot and mao who were both overtly and covertly supported by the americans under the enlightened diplomacy of kissinger.

 

[RipCity]

we can go back and forth about the extremes of facism or communism but its an endless and pointless debate. here are the facts- the nazi's were nationalistic fascists whose rallying cry is eerily similar to the separatists in quebec; pat buchanan's non-sense and the bnp in england as well as other nascent ultra ring wing parties in europe. president obama and the democrats are nothing like these ppl.

as for the massacres committed by communists in the ussr- most of them were committed under stalin's personal reign of despotism. the other big communist murderers were pol pot and mao who were both overtly and covertly supported by the americans under the enlightened diplomacy of kissinger.

No, we really can't go back and forth about this. The facts are pretty simple. On the extreme left wing you have total government control (Socialism, communism, Nazis) On the extreme right you have no government control what so ever. That being said, I'm not implying that Democrats in general belong to any of these groups, I'm just pointing out that they reside left of center in the political spectrum.

Honestly, why don't you stick to selling crack and drinking forties on the corner, intelligent debate is not your forte.

 

[Denny Crane]

we can go back and forth about the extremes of facism or communism but its an endless and pointless debate. here are the facts- the nazi's were nationalistic fascists whose rallying cry is eerily similar to the separatists in quebec; pat buchanan's non-sense and the bnp in england as well as other nascent ultra ring wing parties in europe. president obama and the democrats are nothing like these ppl.

as for the massacres committed by communists in the ussr- most of them were committed under stalin's personal reign of despotism. the other big communist murderers were pol pot and mao who were both overtly and covertly supported by the americans under the enlightened diplomacy of kissinger.

You need to learn your history.

NAZI stands for National SOCIALIST Party. All the big-time mass murderers and committers of genocide in the last 300 years called themselves socialists.

The only guys I know of in the USA who supported Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge are the most extreme left wingers.

 

[deception]

You need to learn your history.

NAZI stands for National SOCIALIST Party. All the big-time mass murderers and committers of genocide in the last 300 years called themselves socialists.

The only guys I know of in the USA who supported Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge are the most extreme left wingers.

i hope your kidding. i cant believe u americans on the extreme right are caught up in names, im more interested in actions. here's a political spectrum chart- replete with pictures and names to demonstrate to u that this discussion is non-sense.

as for pol pot and the khmer rouge: http://musictravel.free.fr/political/political3.htm

The Times editorial of June 24 recognizes a small problem in pursuing Pol Pot, arising from the fact that after he was forced out of Cambodia by Vietnam, "From 1979 to 1991, Washington indirectly backed the Khmer Rouge, then a component of the guerrilla coalition fighting the Vietnamese installed Government [in Phnom Penh]." This does seem awkward: the United States and its allies giving economic, military, and political support to Pol Pot, and voting for over a decade to have his government retain Cambodia's UN seat, but now urging his trial for war crimes. The Times misstates and understates the case: the United States gave direct as well as indirect aid to Pol Pot-in one estimate, $85 million in direct support-and it "pressured UN agencies to supply the Khmer Rouge," which "rapidly improved" the health and capability of Pol Pot's forces after 1979 (Ben Kiernan, "Cambodia's Missed Chance," Indochina Newsletter, Nov.-Dec. 1991). U.S. ally China was a very large arms supplier to Pol Pot, with no penalty from the U.S. and in fact U.S. connivance-Carter's National Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski stated that in 1979 "I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot...Pol Pot was an abomination. We could never support him but China could."

let me give u a little background- there was something called the sino/soviet split and the US in response decided to tacitly back mao, pol pot and any other mutherfucker who would undermine soviet interests in places like vietnam. thats why nixon visited china.

 

[Denny Crane]

Your chart is irrelevant, other than they peg Stalin and Hitler close together. Exactly because they were both socialists.

Your 1979-1991 time frame counters your statement about Kissinger. Carter was elected in 1976.

I supposed you could make a pathetically weak argument about Nixon opening relations with China (and Mao). On the other hand, you might realize that in cold war terms it would be better for the USA to have a 2-on-1 fight against either Russia or China with the other as an ally. Should the worst have happened. And JFK's brinksmanship in the Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest we ever were to nuclear war and Kissinger's and Nixon's Detente policies may well have saved the planet and the human race.

 

[Denny Crane]

 

[deception]

Your chart is irrelevant, other than they peg Stalin and Hitler close together. Exactly because they were both socialists.

Your 1979-1991 time frame counters your statement about Kissinger. Carter was elected in 1976.

I supposed you could make a pathetically weak argument about Nixon opening relations with China (and Mao). On the other hand, you might realize that in cold war terms it would be better for the USA to have a 2-on-1 fight against either Russia or China with the other as an ally. Should the worst have happened. And JFK's brinksmanship in the Cuban Missile Crisis was the closest we ever were to nuclear war and Kissinger's and Nixon's Detente policies may well have saved the planet and the human race.

kissinger opened up relations with dubious figures like mao, suharto- no doubt about it. btw, that 79-91 time frame covers the entire term of your personal hero's presidency.

in your slanted opinion- kissinger and nixon saved millions of lives but they also undoubtedly cost the lives of millions of ppl in southeast asia and other cold war battle grounds. ever wonder why kissinger doesnt take his wrinkled arse to europe? well because they would arrest his arse and send him to the hague where he belongs, along with the other war criminals. here christopher hitchens documents the case against kissinger: http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Kissinger/CaseAgainst1_Hitchens.html

 

[deception]

Your chart is irrelevant, other than they peg Stalin and Hitler close together. Exactly because they were both socialists.

stalin and hitler are pegged together because they fall in the same place on the authoritarian side, no argument here. stalin was not a socialist, no, he was a despot, big difference. your mother is a socialist because i would imagine she shared everything she had with your arse.

 

[Denny Crane]

I've seen that Hitchens piece before, and it's one long string of undocumentable assertions. "If only we had those secret documents, we could really pin something on him!" Rather like Joseph McCarthy, don't you think?

There aren't even photos, like this one of Jimmy Carter and the Shah of Iran:

Or this one of Jimmy Carter also:

 

[Denny Crane]

stalin and hitler are pegged together because they fall in the same place on the authoritarian side, no argument here. stalin was not a socialist, no, he was a despot, big difference. your mother is a socialist because i would imagine she shared everything she had with your arse.

Google "command economy" and "demand economy" and get back to me, perhaps with some knowledge about these things.

 

[deception]

I've seen that Hitchens piece before, and it's one long string of undocumentable assertions. "If only we had those secret documents, we could really pin something on him!" Rather like Joseph McCarthy, don't you think?

There aren't even photos, like this one of Jimmy Carter and the Shah of Iran:

Or this one of Jimmy Carter also:

in hindsight- the shah wasnt that bad of a dude, especially in light of what followed him. and u do realize that i could easily produce the photo's of rumsfled with saddam as well. my point being here is that the americans have made some dubious bedfellows to do their bidding.

 

[deception]

Google "command economy" and "demand economy" and get back to me, perhaps with some knowledge about these things.

what u fail to realize is that im not some wacky lefty who's hellbent on imposing his beliefs on anyone. i consider myself a reasonable man who's unfettered by the extremes, left or right. to that end, equating the obama administration with the nazi's is both irresponsible and stupid, thats part of the reason why your national discourse on all things political has been undermined by the psycho babble, i.e. obama is hitler in blackface

 

[Denny Crane]

I don't at all think that Obama is hitler in blackface, as you put it.

I think he's looking incompetent surrounded by incompetents.

He's accomplished little, and that's through a lack of leadership on his own part. Likely that is due to bad advise from those he surrounded himself with in his administration.

He's spending us into oblivion, and the legislation he's fighting for is bad policy. Especially this health care bill that is absurdly expensive and is little more than a transfer of $1T from taxpayers (through higher taxes) and (1/2 that figure from) medicare to big insurance companies. It's been debated for over a year, he's taken his case to the people directly, and few people buy that it's worth passing.

He's neglected the common man. His predictions about keeping unemployment lower through his only significant passed legislation have proven to be wrong, and he hasn't adjusted his policies to address the things govt. did wrong that have put real hurt on millions of people. To make it worse, he seems to not even care about them, as his best offer is a $1500 check to help people move into their cars after their homes get foreclosed on by the banks.

The city of Detroit is all but a ghost town after he meddled in their largest industry. It was one of the most beautiful places in the USA. Now there isn't a single chain grocery store in the city limits, debilitated homes can be bought for $10,000 or less, and the only successful big business is Ford who steered clear of government interference.

The money he spent on his stimulus package would literally have funded 32,000 startup companies, each with 100 to 200 employees for 5 years. Add up the jobs and it's between 3.2M and 6.4M, and they'd all be paying taxes and their mortgages instead of getting an extended unemployment check and being foreclosed on. 32,000 companies could have meant 8,000 green energy companies, 8,000 manufacturing companies, and you still have 16,000 companies that could have been strategically placed in states that are firing policemen and firemen and teachers because they can't balance their budgets.

The debt he's racking up is unprecedented, except during WW II. The problem is that the interest payments on that debt will be quadruple what we're paying in interest payments now, and we will be faced with choosing between paying rich people and foreign countries their interest due them or elderly people their social security checks. That is after doubling our taxes on everything.

Sorry, but I don't see any of these things as reasonable to argue for, nor do the people. At every opportunity since Obama's election, the people have elected anyone they could who'd at least be a speed bump for this terrible agenda. Obama's now in a rush to pass this bad health care bill because he sees the writing on the wall - the house and senate could both be republican controlled after November, mostly his own doing.

I am a pragmatic libertarian. On your diamond shaped political spectrum, I'm right up near the topmost point. The pragmatic part of me says that since our elected officials insist on making government big and intrusive, the best we can do is try to keep the threat to civil liberties in check and make sure the money we're paying in taxes is well spent.

To that end, I've proposed and supported a purely socialized medical program as a public option that doesn't cost the taxpayer $1T or transfer $.01 to the insurance companies. Something like it was never considered by any of the politicians, particularly the ones who excluded the minority party in all deliberations, and to the disappointment of their own base of voters. They're backed into a corner, politically, where they lose 100 seats if they don't pass the bill and 99 if they do, and they'll be damned if they lose that extra seat over a measly $1T and all the bill's ill effects.

 

[deception]

look to the world, teabagger!!! my prime minister, stephen harper stormed onto the political scene in the late 80's lauding "less government, less cheese, liberty and christ". well in the 20 years or so interim before he became relevant as the prime minister of canada- the liberals (centre- left) dominated canadian politics with unchallenged majorities. to put it in layman terms- the canadian public from coast to coast gave them a mandate to do as they wished for nearly 20 years. and what did the liberals do? they cut and they cut some more, so much so that the deficit the conservatives amassed in the 80's trying to spend themselves out of a recession was gone by the mid 90's.

deja vu in 2010? harper hobbled into power with a minority government but managed to amass a hefty deficit trying to spend "us" out of a recession and the liberals here are at the door again promising a hatchet job. the morale of the story is that recession spending is a necessary evil and the politricks is an unnecessary side show.

as for some of your comments- i agree that some of the stimulus spending seems superfluous but i think its more a function of deal making which occurs on both sides of the aisles than anything else. its funny how u cite detroit as example of decay yet if u know anything about detroit and the state of michigan at large- u would know that its been in steady decline since the 80's. i had a ex boss of mine who visited detroit soon after the foreclosure crisis hit the front page news and he took pictures of entire neighbourhoods abandoned, that didnt happen over night

 

[Denny Crane]

Obama just appears to be completely tone deaf about things that ultimately matter to the citizens here.

Obama facing uprising over new NASA strategy

Americans' Global Warming Concerns Continue to Drop

Obama's liberal base 'disengaged'

Gallup Daily: Obama Job Approval (new low)

Budget deficit sets record in February

Unemployment tops 20% in eight California counties
The state's jobless rate of 12.5% in January was its worst on record and fifth-highest in the nation.

Gov't workers feel no economic pain
Security, wages, benefits beat private sector's

 

[RipCity]

as for some of your comments- i agree that some of the stimulus spending seems superfluous but i think its more a function of deal making which occurs on both sides of the aisles than anything else. its funny how u cite detroit as example of decay yet if u know anything about detroit and the state of michigan at large- u would know that its been in steady decline since the 80's. i had a ex boss of mine who visited detroit soon after the foreclosure crisis hit the front page news and he took pictures of entire neighbourhoods abandoned, that didnt happen over night

Sean Hannity is currently doing a series of segments on Stimulus spending...

So far we've seen $200,000 to preserve Michigan State Universities Bug Collection, $219,000 to Syracuse University for a study on collegiate sexual behavior, and $96,000 to the Providence, Rhode Island Police Department to buy their supervisors new Blackberrys.

The stimulus package was a fucking joke.

 

[Denny Crane]

Wow, the stimulus bill was $800B and Hannity is whining about amounts in the $100K range?

 

[RipCity]

There's going to be 102 of these segments, we're on number 3.