NIXON: Well, when the president does it that means that it is not illegal.

FROST: By definition.

NIXON: Exactly. Exactly.

why is the piece of shit not in prison?

All rights come from the government. Even the right to massacre entire villages of people.

JOHN YOO, is a PUNK!!! An this Fuck should be at the HAGUE standing accused of War Crimes!!!!!!! Like most of the Bush Administrations Legal team!!!!

Wow!

Now, the leftist subversives want to cut-off Bush's head for having POWER!

Since that POWER is still available to Obama ... should we ... what is the liars words? ...

"why is the piece of shit not in prison?"

Why do you want to put Obama in prison, jerkyknee?

I see why you named yourself in that way, you run like a coward from the truth, since it hurts ...

During the initial Iraq invasion United States military were at the Syrian border wiping out entire villages during night runs. They claimed that these people helped move secret missiles from Iraq into Syria.

Murderers.

Here we go again

Bush this. Bush that

"Bush this, Bush that...."

I know what you mean. Just too bad that man was, for want of a better word, prolific.

Hitler also had the legal to massacre entire villages, and in fact did so. Yes, this is a Nazis comparison, one Mr. Yoo should have been aware concerning.

Never miss a beat. Bush is Hitler. Say that 10000 times

Here we go again
Bush this. Bush that

Sure, because he's no longer the sitting President we should just forget he ever existed and no longer analyze, consider or be pissed off at the bullshit he pulled while in office.

I can completely understand where you're coming from.

Geez--Bush fought this war with a scalpel. Too much so until he decided to do the surge.

No villages "massacred".

They gave out flyers of the impending fight, they dropped food and MRE's to the people in Afghanistan and Iraq.

And Bush is responsible for liberating 50 million people.

Just call him a radical liberator.

"Bush is Hitler...."

No, of course Bush wasn't Hitler. Hitler was brighter than Bush and more intuitive. Moreover, for what was really the majority of his tenure as Warlord, Hitler had a solid eye for both strategy and tactics.

In some respects, I agree with this Yoo guy - Not that I wish to see innocent civilians massacred.

I am not an American. Nor do I plan to become one, chiefly because of the direction this once great nation is heading. I have been living here (legally) and paying my taxes and such for over 12 years though, and a year ago married a beautiful American woman.

**If you want to keep your country safe from those who care nothing of human rights, personal freedom, etc., you must be prepared to make difficult decisions in order to stop, deter, and punish these idiots!**

They do not understand American ideas, ideals, freedoms, etc. Nor do they have any comprehension of "Western" justice systems. They (like much the rest of the world) are laughing at America.

I am by no means advocating "we" resort to Guerrilla Warefare and Terrorism, stepping us down to their level. But they must be shown that they cannot do what they are so hellbent on doing (that is the destruction of any entity that opposes the way they've lived for a thousand years... or disagrees with them, even slightly, about their beliefs).

I am not at all anti-American... I'm just more understanding of things outside of her... in the real world. There are many times when I, too, laugh at the US, as a whole.
Bush was the second biggest mistake your nation has ever made. The biggest is Obama.
I've been to many places; lived many places. I'm speaking from my experience with other peoples and their cultures, beliefs, and governments.

+James

And Bush is responsible for liberating 50 million people.

In your estimation or those who he "liberated"?

(Before you say it, yes, I think the world is better off without Sadam. However, I'm just curious as to whether your opinion actually takes into account those most affected by it)

And Bush is responsible for liberating 50 million people

population Iraq 2003 25 million

upwards of 1 million+ dead

just saying

upwards of 1 million+ dead

Another 4 million liberated from their homes, courtesy of ethnic cleansing. China liberated $3 trillion from US to pay for Chimpy's folly.

why is the piece of shit not in prison?

#2 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

I can certainly see why people would disagree with him, but what did he actually do that deserves prison time?

I believe it criminal if the attorneys conspired with the administration to create a legal justification to do what they knew to be illegal.

I believe it criminal if the attorneys conspired with the administration to create a legal justification to do what they knew to be illegal.

#19 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS

Seems strange to send people to jail for it though, if the legal justification is in fact there. Sure it may be a stretch or a loophole, but if it can be stretched or a loophole found isn't that the fault of the lawmakers for not writing the law better?

If all he did was tell the White House (paraphrased of course), "According to my interpretation of the Constitution you can kill anyone you want," I don't see how he can be punished criminally. Disbarred maybe if his interpretation and counsel were so off, but he didn't actually do anything.

there are plenty of mob lawyers behind bars, yoo is in the same class

"Bush is Hitler...."

No, of course Bush wasn't Hitler. Hitler was brighter than Bush and more intuitive. Moreover, for what was really the majority of his tenure as Warlord, Hitler had a solid eye for both strategy and tactics.
#12 | Posted by Zed at 2010-02-20 03:36 PM

I completely agree with every word - particularly "the majority of his tenure", as we could see from the latter months Adolf Hitler was in severe mental decline.

George Bush makes Kim Jong Ill appear sober.

None of the invasion was Bush's "tactical" knowledge - that's for certain. "His" war wasn't even planned by him, let alone understood. The neo-con cabal wrote everything years in advance - particularly the events of 9/11 which were manipulated into the impetus for stage II - the invasions of oil-rich competitor nations.

But Clinton got a blowjob and he didn't go to prison.... The Right

Based on the available info, conservatives are unscrupulous immoral self-serving goatfuckers at heart. And no, that is not me painting with a broadbrush.

But Clinton got a blowjob and he didn't go to prison.... The Right

#23 | POSTED BY MODER8

He and a lot of people from his admin also killed a lot of innocent people in a Sudanese aspirin factory.

Should he go to jail for that? Or is it only Republicans kill innocent people? Or do you think Only Republicans should go to jail for it and Dems should walkaway free?

If I'm ever waterboarded, sleep deprived, or hung up by the wrists and beaten, I'll tell the torturers they're using "poor judgment." That'll get 'em.

infallible leaders anointed by god.

the president's war-making authority was so broad that he had the constitutional power to order a village to be "massacred,"

Posted by truthhurts

sooo, it seems that the viewpoint that truth-hurts advances via the Newsweek article is that . . .

Bush "did NOT ever abuse" that power he is alleged to have had . . as such, he must be a pretty "stand up" guy

aka - - truth-hurts is now a "Bushie"?

the president's war-making authority was so broad that he had the constitutional power to order a village to be "massacred,"

Posted by truthhurts

huh?
yet Bush did NOT massacre any villages

sooo, it seems that the viewpoint that truth-hurts advances via the Newsweek article is that . . .

Bush "did NOT ever abuse" that power he is alleged to have had . . as such, he must be a pretty "stand up" guy

aka - - truth-hurts is now a "Bushie"?

#28 | Posted by markh

he didnt?

Bush (and now obama) wage war without restraint across many borders, torture, subject people to rendition and commit other atrocities.

this is another example of the conspiracy to commit war crimes. sorry if you cant understand that.

#29 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2010-02-20 06:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

When Obama kills half a million people, you let us know. Your link only referred to drone attacks.

Clinton bombed Kosovo, Johnson bombed thousands of villages, FDR bombed Dresden, Truman dropped two bombs that annihilated entire cities. And--lest we forget--Obama is conducting a war as we speak in which civilians are dying.

Nothing like a bunch of libbies who can't see the double standard. Guess what--if we're at war, then it's bombs away.

Obama is just as guilty as Bush. There is no need to be in any of these wars, other than to appease the frightened pants pissers who see "terrorists" in their closets. We have more than enough home grown terrorists to worry about, called GANGS, and Organized crime.

Poor little would-be turd polishers.

Revisionist history will never be enough to salvage the reputation of the alcoholic homosexual failed-businessman ex-cheerleader that became the most incompetent leader the world has ever known.

In order to polish a turd, you need something more than a foul smelling wet spot on the ground to start with.

When Obama kills half a million people, you let us know. Your link only referred to drone attacks.

#31 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob
* * * *

Fair enough. At what point is it a war crime? Twenty? Twenty thousand? How many Middle East civilians have to die on Obama's watch before you pompom-pumping pussies decide to pack him up and send him over to the Hague?

Nothing like a bunch of libbies who can't see the double standard. Guess what--if we're at war, then it's bombs away.

#32 | Posted by rightisright at 2010-02-20 06:42 PM | Reply | Flag

Says the robot. What country opposes us in this war? Where is their army? Who can surrender to us? When do we know we have won? What are we fighting for? WTF are you talking about? Any answers at all? At least North Vietnam was a country, and they had an army opposing us. Who is the leader of the opposing force? We are not at war--we are just killing people----Americans and foreignors alike, for absolutely no reason at all.

nothing like a rightie who cant recognize a conspiracy when he sees it

if we're at war, then it's bombs away

if you could provide a link to said declaration of war I would be interested in seeing it.

Fair enough. At what point is it a war crime? Twenty? Twenty thousand? How many Middle East civilians have to die on Obama's watch before you pompom-pumping pussies decide to pack him up and send him over to the Hague?

#35 | Posted by rightisright at 2010-02-20 06:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think it is a war crime now, and say so. You will defend Bush till the death.

I don't defend Bush. I believe that any time troops are sent on combat missions, you're supposed to have the sanction of Congress. That's another thing I thought I was signing up for with the Republicans, and never got. That doesn't make it a war crime, necessarily, just unconstitutional.

Up to me, I would have bombed Afghanistan completely to hell, and invaded Saudi Arabia. It was their money that financed 9/11, after all. And before doing anything I would have headed down to Capitol Hill and asked for a formal declaration of war against both of them.

But he wasn't me.

Up to me, I would have bombed Afghanistan completely to hell, and invaded Saudi Arabia. It was their money that financed 9/11, after all. And before doing anything I would have headed down to Capitol Hill and asked for a formal declaration of war against both of them.

But he wasn't me.

#40 | Posted by rightisright at 2010-02-20 06:53 PM | Reply | Flag

Criminals attacked us. Send in kill teams---not the army. Bribe, and threaten for intel on who the bad guys are. Sending in the army after criminals makes as much sense and using the army to fight the gangs on LA.

Sending "kill teams" into sovereign nations is an act of war, you know. Just like blockading Iraq with air, land, and sea embargoes. Can't have it both ways.

Johnson bombed thousands of villages,...

#32 | Posted by rightisright

And at the time, people like me were in the streets protesting and rightwing shitheads like you were calling us traitors and demanding escalation of the war, hypocrite.

Bush (and now obama) wage war without restraint across many borders, torture, subject people to rendition and commit other atrocities.

this is another example of the conspiracy to commit war crimes. sorry if you cant understand that.

#30 | Posted by truthhurts

And at the time, people like me were in the streets protesting and rightwing shitheads like you were calling us traitors and demanding escalation of the war, hypocrite.

#43 | Posted by nullifidian

* * *

People "like" you. And people "like" me.

And you're right--I was out there marching for an escalation of the war, even though I was six months old.

That said, where are the big anti-war demonstrations these days? Is it that you don't care, now that you know you'll never be called up? Were your protests because you actually cared about the war? Or just yellow?

Criminals attacked us. Send in kill teams---not the army.

#41 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob

Null,

RiR was too young to be calling for an escalation.

BTW we actualy got some good stuff out here. Blue Dream or Blue Dream Haze not sure if there is a difference. Yummy good head high but compared to the normal out here I have to be carefull it's not a far cry from great high to too high.

Anyway it was nice to see some great stuff float on out east.

Sending "kill teams" into sovereign nations is an act of war, you know. Just like blockading Iraq with air, land, and sea embargoes. Can't have it both ways.

#42 | Posted by rightisright at 2010-02-20 06:59 PM | Reply | Flag

So is invasion. The point stands---Kill teams instead of armies.

opened plenty of em, including histories of rome, england, spaid, portugal, netherlands, france, russia, germany,

empires rise and fall

just curious what do you contest is incorrect in the statement I made

war without restraint, bombing sudan, somalia, yemen, afghanistan, iraq, pakistan, etc all without a declaration of war

waterboarding is torture, abu graib is torture, tortuing people to death is torture

rendition is illegal.

is there something in a history book which will say we havent done that in the past 10 years?

Bob, that is illegal

#46 | Posted by markh at 2010-02-20 07:06 PM | Reply | Flag:

BFD.

And at the time, people like me were in the streets protesting and rightwing shitheads like you were calling us traitors and demanding escalation of the war, hypocrite.
#43 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Holy Shit! You're about my age. A Berkley college student maybe?

JamesBC says, "... There are many times when I, too, laugh at the US, as a whole."

Is that British Columbia? Not quite the cosmopolitian high horse to be doing too much laughing, though, right m8?

Most of my time spent outside the US has been in Asia (Japan, S. Vietnam, Thailand). I didn't observe much in the way of laughter. Most of any in-depth expression of emotion was a kind of disappointment - that the USA talked a good schtick, but failed to deliver, and ever since Korea (while in 'Nam it was Truman's support of France's hegemony and which actually started the war).

Indeed, my South Vietnamese counterpart predicted that the USA would abandon Vietnam because the US people were selfish and didn't really support freedom and liberty around the world. He thought that the US would pull out within two years, and that was in 1966. I'm sure he was amazed that we continued the battle until the Democrat controlled congress withdrew *all* funds for their defense, and after our troops left, 9 years later.

That's laughable isn't it? That millions died at the hands of the vengeful North Vietnamese communist imperialists? The same aggressors who had been actively enabled by the Democrat party sponsoring John Kerry's treason in meeting them outside of the Paris Peace Talks, and then treating with them by literally lying about US atrocities, and giving the North an excuse to withdraw from the talks?

Funny to those who aren't actually anti-American, I'm sure.

"Bush was the second biggest mistake your nation has ever made."

Bush was the hope of millions of those in the ME and specifically Irag, since '91. At that time, Democrats mocked Bush Sr. for NOT freeing those millions, but only non-partisans remember - do you?. And what now?

He is a laughing stock to leftists who would literally let the rest of the world go str8 to hell, in order to get "free" healthcare and cringe at the idea that Bush Jr. DID allow the millions of two ME nations to have a chance at Democracy.

"The biggest is Obama."

BS! Obama may be the poorest president ever to gain the office, but it demonstrates to the world that US citizens are one of the least racist nations ever to exist on this planet. We are willing to try for such social progress and follow our willingness up with facts and actions.

Where is the first British black prime minister? Australia? Canada? Even the most liberal of all, New Zealand?

"I've been to many places; lived many places. I'm speaking from my experience with other peoples and their cultures, beliefs, and governments."

Those who hate the USA say they laugh at it ... otherwise they know that this is the greatest nation on Earth, ever. Our only fault is the idea that Europe is some ideal to emulate; when it has actually been the source of most of all historical misery, war, class and racial hatreds ... and with all the rest of the world running second to them!

I suggest you get down from that old nag you're up on, Oh Canada ...

"And you're right--I was out there marching for an escalation of the war, even though I was six months old."

No shithead, I said people "like you", i.e., rightwing dumbasses. You fuckers were all for escalation during Johnson's term.

Tad,

Great post.

And at the time, people like me were in the streets protesting and rightwing shitheads like you were calling us traitors and demanding escalation of the war, hypocrite.

43 | Posted by nullifidian at 2010-02-20 06:59 PM

Holy Shit! You're about my age. A Berkley college student maybe?

#51 | Posted by Ray at 2010-02-20 07:10 PM

Null says, "No shithead, I said people "like you", i.e., rightwing dumbasses. You fuckers were all for escalation during Johnson's term."

Actually, as I remember, they (rightwing) were down on Johnson for being a Democrat and trying to escalate the war. Besides that, the protest of the war began when Kennedy increased Special Forces troop levels dramatically, and permitted them to engage the enemy as tactical units.

However, as with the Democrats in the 1990 and 2002 Iraq war, the rightwing "patriotically" voted in support of our Democrat commander in chief and to support the freedom of an independent nation under attack by communist aggression. That's something we had claimed the right to do, since WWII under Democrat direction and control - be the world's police force to fight the "Cold War".

Of course, I agree that Democrats did start abandoning Vietnam during the Johnson administration, and actually plotted war protests when they knew that Johnson would not seek his second term. For that matter, Johnson was giving up because the party was starting to abandon him and he felt betrayed as a loyal party member and as an American who believed in defending our allies under attack against force of arms, terror and, or other communist extortion.

Democrats sure do abandon with supreme expertise due to their vast experience in losing; ever since they lost their precious slaves to Northern constitutional conservatism vis a vis human rights trumping property rights ...

Quitters, that's the Democratic Party, no doubt ...

Maybe you need to get more specific, Chris

I don't defend Bush. I believe that any time troops are sent on combat missions, you're supposed to have the sanction of Congress. That's another thing I thought I was signing up for with the Republicans, and never got. That doesn't make it a war crime, necessarily, just unconstitutional.
Up to me, I would have bombed Afghanistan completely to hell, and invaded Saudi Arabia. It was their money that financed 9/11, after all. And before doing anything I would have headed down to Capitol Hill and asked for a formal declaration of war against both of them.
But he wasn't me.
#40 | Posted by rightisright at 2010-02-20 06:53 PM

We know that Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11 - to bomb that nation would have created a ME coalition that would pressure Israel into backing us out from the ME entirely. Instead, through this "invasion" scenario we now have a multitude of PMB's and access to more of the largest un-nationalized reserves of oil.

I think it's about time you two shared a doobie.
#55 | POSTED BY CALIFCHRIS

Bush was the hope of millions of those in the ME and specifically Irag, since '91.

As evident by all the flowers and chocolates showered on our troops.

what is the color of the sky in your world?

Redlight knows that the reason the NATO forces have been able to do so much in Afghanistan is because the people know of the US support against the tyranny attempted to be established by the Soviet invasion, and because NATO has actually followed through in allowing self-rule, the vote and encouraging development.

The only force in armed revolt against democracy is the Taliban and others intent on establishing a theocratic dictatorship; including active support for insurgency from Iran.

Only socialists and Islamic fundamentalists, al Qaeda et al, whine about liberty and freedom for Afghanistan's millions and attack that chance with bombs and words. Why you Democrats provide moral support to these hatemongers is way, way beyond me.

Why do you hate the USA so much?

Only socialists and Islamic fundamentalists, al Qaeda et al, whine about liberty and freedom for Afghanistan's millions and attack that chance with bombs and words. Why you Democrats provide moral support to these hatemongers is way, way beyond me.

Where do you get that kind of bullshit from? They're fighting us because our military invaded their country and is ruthlessly killing their families - just like the Soviets we rescued them from.

And at the time, people like me were in the streets protesting

Ha.

Fuckin' old ass.

Did you put little flowers in your hair, too?

Jak I saw your pic with your horse. You are scrawnier than I imagined.

"Holy Shit! You're about my age. A Berkley college student maybe?

#51 | Posted by Ray "

I said people "like me", Ray. Unfortunately, I was too young to fight the cops in Chicago. Of course you sat on your ass, just like today. Maybe you ought to put some of your gold behind your convictions.

I was too young to fight the cops in Chicago

You just spanked to high art like this---about fighting the cops:

Did you put little flowers in your hair, too?

#64 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao

No, Jacque. Did your fellow frat boys pin flowers on you, or deflower you, during the "best days of your life"?

Not even a headband, Null?

"--about fighting the cops:"

Yeah I knew that bait would get a bite.

"Not even a headband, Null?"

No way dude. Ski masks are the way to go when engaged in serious street fighting with The Man.

Of course you sat on your ass, just like today. Maybe you ought to put some of your gold behind your convictions.
#66 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

I have - by privately storing it, so it's there when I need it. The John Galt method.

There until the govt kicks down your door and demands you hand it over.

You could have been Billy O'Reilly-Jack.

Ray drops a small one, "Where do you get that kind of bullshit from?"

Your quasi-libertarian kind, or mine?

Finally, Ray squeezes out the BIG one, "They're fighting us because our military invaded their country and is ruthlessly killing their families - just like the Soviets we rescued them from."

Who are you talking about - "they"? Is it the Taliban and other Islamic fundamentalists; spec., al Qaeda; that I already mentioned?

If so, then why the silly hyperbole? The POPULATION I mentioned is not fighting the NATO forces! It is a shrinking minority that is, and will continue to shrink since the "invasion" can be seen to be benevolent and temporary (they'll decide) by the majority.

Your kind of "bs" is a result of libertarian brainwashing, and your heuristic acceptance of that. There is no such requirement that there must be a formal declaration of war to conduct 'military operations'. Most such US 'military actions' have been without the force that a formal declaration is meant to provide the commander in chief - almost unlimited power over US citizens, suspension of many 'rights' and 'privileges', martial law, internment camps, etc.

Why would you give a president such unlimited powers when a continuing resolution is the same thing without martial law conditions? Congress funds wars, and thereby permit the continuing 'military war'.

Suck it up, liberal sound-alike about specious claims concerning this issue.

JAK

That was a cool pic of you and your son.

Curious: Why the new looking chaps in the pic? Were you doing an event?

Redlight knows that the reason the NATO forces have been able to do so much in Afghanistan is because the people know of the US support against the tyranny attempted to be established by the Soviet invasion, and because NATO has actually followed through in allowing self-rule, the vote and encouraging development.
The only force in armed revolt against democracy is the Taliban and others intent on establishing a theocratic dictatorship; including active support for insurgency from Iran.
Only socialists and Islamic fundamentalists, al Qaeda et al, whine about liberty and freedom for Afghanistan's millions and attack that chance with bombs and words. Why you Democrats provide moral support to these hatemongers is way, way beyond me.
Why do you hate the USA so much?
#61 | Posted by tadowe at 2010-02-20 08:22 PM

We've had our falling out - I asked USA not to send more troops into Iraq, but establish infrastructure readiness and prepare for next weeks Iran/Iraq block BBQ, but he simply won't abide by anything less than a permanent military presence. He's so stubborn, I don't know why I try.

And when USA was "publicly" snubbing Russia he was also giving impetus for a micro-invasion of Georgia and thus control over Caspian oil and gas - squeezing Europe from the North, while Israel double-teams from the South. You might not know this but Russia is dating Israel - some think they already eloped.

GB is still in love with USA.. and USA wants to keep Israel on the side, knowing it inevitably benefits Russia. I know they've planned their invasions together, but I don't feel too put out. GB really started this mess in Iraq and it seems right that USA would have to confess involvement, the same as Russia, but like I said - he's so stubborn! Either way, you may be right - love him or hate him our relationship is getting more complex by the invasion.

"Only socialists and Islamic fundamentalists, al Qaeda et al, whine about liberty and freedom for Afghanistan's millions and attack that chance with bombs and words. Why you Democrats provide moral support to these hatemongers is way, way beyond me."

Where do you get that kind of bullshit from? They're fighting us because our military invaded their country and is ruthlessly killing their families - just like the Soviets we rescued them from.
#62 | Posted by Ray at 2010-02-20 08:29 PM

That and the fight over morphine and heroin production. Selling China our infrastructure rather than purchasing it out directly was genius - the forecast monetary standard outstrips current oil/cash interactions but with the added benefit of Yen backing and Euro distribution of the already destabilized dollars "toxic" assets - which are also backed by Yen. A very small cabal of people will own China's entire economic backing of US assets. In order for that to happen the dollar must die.

This is as predictable as the ten rotating Lawrence Welk versions of "Shipoopi".

Thanks--I was doing a linking experiment on a dead, back page thread I didn't think would make it to the front.

I'd had that pair built about three months prior, and they hadn't seen much use. We don't do "events" around here---just work.

It's very simple, Tad. Our military has no business being in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not to mention Iraq. Our military has no legitimate reason to maintain hundreds of military bases all over the world. It's a senseless drain on our resources.

Your kind of "bs" is a result of libertarian brainwashing, and your heuristic acceptance of that.

Libertarians like me are brainwashed? But militarists like you are not. That's laughable.

Your quasi-libertarian kind, or mine?

Let me see if I have this right. You believe you are a true libertarian because you believe war sets people free. That's so fucked up, I don't know how to respond.

There is no such requirement that there must be a formal declaration of war to conduct 'military operations'.

Truman called his invasion of Korea a "police action." They are euphemisms justify unlimited presidential military authority. It creates a dictator. It's dangerous.

Why would you give a president such unlimited powers when a continuing resolution is the same thing without martial law conditions? Congress funds wars, and thereby permit the continuing 'military war'.

Within my lifetime, in my libertarian world, Truman, Johnson, Nixon, the Bushes, Clinton and now Obama should be tried and hung for war crimes. That would end this military madness once and for all. Shame on American voters for keeping these psychopaths in office.

THAT'S how a real libertarian thinks. The name has gotten so popular in recent years that even socialists like Nulli call themselves libertarian.

JAK

The look on your face as you're looking at your son is a magazine cover. Nothing like the love of a father for his children. It's written all over your face.

That said I hope he's rebellious as hell and grows up to be a Yellow Dog Democrat! It'd serve you right! LOL

Redlight maunders, " ...(incoherent leftist crap) ..."

Oil is evil, like guns are evil. Poppies are evil, they jam the gun's barrel when pretty Afghan girls defy NATO for Sharia under the Taliban ...

You creeps are about as stupid as they come, Red.

All for votes to elevate Democrats, right? That's why your leadership is deserting the sinking ship and jumping in the Bayh ...

THAT'S how a real libertarian thinks. The name has gotten so popular in recent years that even socialists like Nulli call themselves libertarian.

#79 | Posted by Ray

Actually, the original "libertarians" were left-wing anarchists/libertarian socialists, opposed to the state and to capitalism. All of the well-known original libertarians were leftists: Bakunin, Kropotkin, Goldman, Proudhon, etc. American conservatives who liked to smoke pot hijacked the name in the late 1960's and created a rightwing philosophy they called "libertarianism"--which was basically propertarianism with lipstick.

Why Washington maintains a large standing military all over the world. Why Washington initiates wars of aggression for seeming senseless reasons.

There are many times when I, too, laugh at the US, as a whole.
Bush was the second biggest mistake your nation has ever made. The biggest is Obama.

why? what would you have preferred, Mccain?

I've been to many places; lived many places.
I'm speaking from my experience with other peoples and their cultures, beliefs, and governments.

me too, you talk as if americans are blinded by their own reflection --yes, if you believe the TP'ers, the Limbaugh's, the O'Reillys, et al, Mccain.

as far as laughing goes, it is healthy to be able to laugh at one's self, that includes ones country and it's leadership, past and current.

sometimes people complain when voting that they must pick the better of two evils as if there is something terribly bad about that. change does not happen overnight, not does it happen without large support.

America has been languishing in need of some education of their own and world history.

and if the enemies you speak have been hating for a 1000 years, then obviously it isn't America they have been hating, maybe it has something to do with religion?

so in our past 2 or 3 or 4 decades, since Vietnam, of getting fat and stupid people have chosen, as the world around them ugly to them, to cling to their guns and/or bibles.

will we cycle through a history like so many other nations, one where are "turned out" by the thievery of those selling "indulgences" --empty promises, stolen lives, stolen freedom? or of promise of some wonderful world only to be seen until death and then only by some, the chosen?

perhaps you haven't lived here lived enough. it took me decades to understand my father who went from North Carolina and fought his way to swim in Tokyo Bay - and teach young women there how to dance to our big band music. even he would say in public, then to my embarrassment, America isn't ready for black president. maybe i still don't quite understand him. maybe i only heard his tone. he was, after all, a wonderful, fair and loving man. nevertheless, slightly tainted by his surroundings growing up (Depression - 2009).

perhaps you haven't lived here lived enough = long enoiugh

#82

nice work, Nulli. just what we, more and better education. (me too.)

American conservatives who liked to smoke pot hijacked the name in the late 1960's and created a rightwing philosophy they called "libertarianism"--which was basically propertarianism with lipstick.

Socialists are notorious for hating property rights. Liberty without property rights is impossible.

Without property rights, slavery is impossible.

translation: International Law does not apply to the USA (only losers like the Nazis).

We can invade, kidnap, torture any person or country that is smaller than us.

#82 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

The etymological root of "libertarian" is liberty. The enemies of liberty hide behind the label.

"Liberty without property rights is impossible."

Property rights are just one of a whole set of conceivable human rights that may or not be codified or recognized by any given community.

Null,

Without property rights you can not have human rights. Your body is your property if you give up all property rights you give up the rights to your own body.

Not that we the people have the right to our body under our currently recognized law but that wasn't the argument. The fact is property rights must exist for any other human right to have meaning

Ray says, "It's very simple, Tad."

I'm not surprised that you're confined to the simple, Ray.

"Our military has no business being in Afghanistan and Pakistan, not to mention Iraq."

Your opinion isn't the law, Ray. If Ron Paul becomes president (about the time pigs fly) he will continue supporting the NATO action in Afghanistan.

Conservatism is a matter of constitutional support, and which calls for the federal government to defend the nation. You libertarians want to cower within the boarders of the nation and issue complaints if we're attacked.

You're an admitted coward who avoided the draft and refused to defend the nation when the majority felt it necessary. You tried, or forced someone else to bear the burden your precious 'liberty' quailed at doing.

... and I was the one your ilk spit on, threatened my wife and family while I was at war, and now pretend to be patriotic with your stay at home, poltroonish opinion ...

No wonder I think you are nothing more than just another moronic Democrat ...

A few days ago I mentioned the ATP (American Taxpayer Party) Meet and Vote Program... I relate these people to current events (TP'ers, et al).
in nutshell... a direct vote on all issues.

The American Taxpayer party and it's "Meet and Vote" program revolve around the belief that the majority of the American Taxpayers would make the proper decisions on the issues that face us if they were properly informed about them and were given the opportunity to decide these issues.

It's our big chance to do an end run around the squabbling, bickering and finger pointing of our legislators who seem to have such a hard time settling the issues that we want settled - like the questionable wars that we have found ourselves in and the invasion of foreigners from the south.

Most importantly the "Meet and Vote" program will not allow a run away president since the decisions on all issues will be voted on by the American Taxpayers - reducing the vote of the president (and each member of Congress) to one vote among 300,000,000.

then from links nulli provided there's Agorism (a term representing a revolutionary type of anarcho-capitalism or free-market anarchism):

Schulman integrated the idea of counter-economics into Konkin's libertarian philosophy, which is the advocacy of untaxed black market activity, which agorists say will lead to development of private defense force sufficient to protect private property and liberty from the state to the point where such protection is strong enough to overthrow the state.
[bold emphasis mine]

hmm... looks and smells very familiar.

...just remember the warnings in that LP execs letter, especially his identification of current so-called "conservatives":
"...most conservatives simply don't want small government. They want their own version of big government. Of course, they have done a pretty good job of fooling American voters for decades by repeating the phrases "limited government" and "small government" like a hypnotic chant."

these people (below) are conservative leaders, right TP'ers:

"Redeemed by prohibition America will 'go over the top' in humanity's greatest battle... struggling with the same age-long foe, we will go forth with the spirit of the missionary and the crusader to help drive the demon of drink from all civilization." Reverend Sam Small in 1917, Washington, D. C. Anti‑saloon League's convention "...you and I may proudly expect to see this America of ours, victorious and Christianized, become not only the savior but the model and the monitor of the reconstructed civilization of the world in the future."

The Reverend Josiah Strong, coeditor of the magazine "The Gospel of the Kingdom," in 1914 "Personal Liberty is at last an uncrowned king, with no one to do him reverence. ...We are no longer frightened by that ancient bogey...."

First Lady Nancy Reagan: "Any user of illicit drugs is an accomplice to murder."

Former U. S. government drug czar and Secretary of Education William Bennett: "Drug abuse is a product of the Great Deceiver.... We need to bring these people in need the God who heals."

Thus the Libertarian's complaint:
"This role of universal religious-therapeutic saviorship seems to fit America's collective spirit so perfectly that we have preserved the play intact, merely modernizing it. We have replaced the actors: liquor with cocaine, Christianity with Medicine. And we intensified the struggle by equipping the combatants with more powerful weapons: temptations more irresistible than man has ever known. It is a fatal weakness of prudential critiques of drug policy that they ignore the 'religious' character of the war on drugs."

With this "we" destroy whole villages. Not only we, but it has been going on for thousands of years.

that is:
It is a fatal weakness of prudential critiques of ourselves as a nation that they ignore the 'religious' character our prohibitions and our wars.

I'd had that pair built about three months prior, and they hadn't seen much use. We don't do "events" around here---just work.

#78 | Posted by Jak_Se_Mao

He looks like one of the village people.

" Your body is your property if you give up all property rights you give up the rights to your own body."

That's what capitalism does. Turns everything into commodities and all relationships into commodity exchanges. How can you "own" your body? You areyour body. You can't own yourself. You are yourself. That type of thinking shows how deeply propertarian ideology is ingrained.

Tyrants force the mob to work, but provide food and shelter with the help of investors. When the mob is replete, they yearn for freedom and democracy, and the investors aid them. When they achieve democracy, the mob works for investors to provide food and shelter, and yearn to vote themselves benefits by taxing the investors. When the investors run out of money, the mob becomes an anarchy and kills the goose, etc., and yearn for a tyrant to shelter and feed them ... enter the investor like a phoenix reborn ...

We're in the pre-anarchy stage of socialism, now, and when the money runs out, or it is worth more to burn for fuel, then the stupid mob (in this case calling themselves Democrats, in the main) will be after anyone who works for the government, is rich, or a color of skin they don't like ... IRS agent, child service tyrant, divorce court shyster, judge or plaintiff ...

... I wonder why Apocalypto comes to mind ...?

Got your pump 12 gauge and reloading equipment, yet, you property owners and investors? If you don't use it this generation (lucky us) then pass it on to the next, they'll need it ...

Redlight maunders, " ...(incoherent leftist crap) ..."
Oil is evil, like guns are evil. Poppies are evil, they jam the gun's barrel when pretty Afghan girls defy NATO for Sharia under the Taliban ...
You creeps are about as stupid as they come, Red.
All for votes to elevate Democrats, right? That's why your leadership is deserting the sinking ship and jumping in the Bayh ...
#81 | Posted by tadowe at 2010-02-20 09:51 PM

Oh, monster baby I don't make the rules, yousa merely a Jar Jar in mooey complex poo-doo machinery.

NATO is used as a carrot and a stick - the perfect excuse for Russia to invade Georgia and control the Tbili pipeline is the alleged "threat" of NATO conspiracy. Russia also got to keep it's military establishments within Georgia - who were about to negotiate their removal, so the invasion was well-timed!

Coincidentally, NATO violations was also used as an excuse to invade Iraq under similar conditions - to take over their pipelines and establish permanent military presence. Viola!

I'll bet there are many, many excuses that could have been enacted, but we've seen this setup so many times it's unmistakable.

Tadowe-
Do you own an airplane?

Ichiro says, "hmm... looks and smells very familiar"

Yes, didn't Obama want a National Defense Forces which would be used in the USA, as the military is used overseas? Why is it always Democrats who are considering more and more force?

Of course, using such a prestigious name would certainly outclass something like, "Rightwing Militia Terrorist Defense Army For State Destruction", wouldn't it?

Instead, the Democrats would be *patriotic* in placing armed squads of loving paramilitary to assure peace during some emergency or another - like an uprising of rightwing terrorist conservative and teabagging tax cheats. Aren't you leftist progressives the clever lot, or what?

So clever, in fact, that you project your "smells" onto others, you spokesman for party fascism ... or am I mistaking you for Jackass who loves the socialistic effort to run an auto industry with union as special beneficiaries?

@17

you might go back at one year before the invasion of Iraq when according to the British: "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

was it before the information was "sexed up" -- that Brit committed suicide.

then it was, what? "twisted", and that man wife, a covert CIA agent was outed, contacts endangered. lawyer named "Scooter" finally, and at great to the taxpayer and the nation, took the fall for that one.

Downing Street memo
September Dossier and 45 minute claim

then whole very real human consequences. might also look into the connections of big oil, et al.

then there's the law and the Constitution they swore to uphold:

The right to impeach public officials is secured by the U.S. Constitution in Article I, Sections 2 and 3, which discuss the procedure, and in Article II, Section 4, which indicates the grounds for impeachment: "the President, Vice President, and all civil officers of the United States shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Removing an official from office requires two steps: (1) a formal accusation, or impeachment, by the House of Representatives, and (2) a trial and conviction by the Senate. Impeachment requires a majority vote of the House; conviction is more difficult, requiring a two-thirds vote by the Senate. The vice president presides over the Senate proceedings in the case of all officials except the president, whose trial is presided over by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

Bribery and treason are among the least ambiguous reasons meriting impeachment, but the ocean of wrongdoing encompassed by the Constitution's stipulation of "high crimes and misdemeanors" is vast. Abuse of power and serious misconduct in office fit this category, but one act that is definitely not grounds for impeachment is partisan discord. Several impeachment cases have confused political animosity with genuine crimes. Since Congress, the vortex of partisanship, is responsible for indicting, trying, and convicting public officials, it is necessary for the legislative branch to temporarily cast aside its factional nature and adopt a judicial role.

re: "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

Everyone knows that, and yet that seems to be fine with an awful lot of people.

I must amend that last post. There is still a cottage industry for the stupidly ideological partisan dupes who are good at heart but claim against all evidence that aliens buried Iraq's arsenal and evidence of complicity in 9/11 in the sands of Syria in order to make Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld look like cheap hucksters and cynical manipulators of fear, hate and anger for motives and possible ends that that no decent person would support.

@45

That said, where are the big anti-war demonstrations these days?

Betel wonders, "Tadowe-Do you own an airplane?"

No, but I have a 12 gauge pump shotgun and reloading equipment, in case you mobsters turned fascists take to the streets when you begin starving and trying to get my rice and beans.

However, here is the one you should be talking to about planes, Betel is a nut:

Redlightcreepoid says, "Oh, monster baby I don't make the rules, yousa merely a Jar Jar in mooey complex poo-doo machinery."

One of yours, I believe ...?

Re: Betel wonders, "Tadowe-Do you own an airplane?"

Answer: No

Good.

#52... you contradict yourself, asshat. and Vietnam (The American War) should NEVER have happened.

Ichi cavils, "#52... you contradict yourself, asshat. and Vietnam (The American War) should NEVER have happened."

"The American War" was actually begun by the UN effort to maintain Vietnam as a French colony, and Truman's/Democrat support for that effort.

Once the French were forced out. Truman/Democrats denied Ho's independence and eventually forced the division of Vietnam by the UN.

That situation does not give the communists the excuse to kill fellow Vietnamese in order to establish a tyannical communist regime and kill millions in "consolidating" their "victory".

I'm not worried about any "contradiction" of myself, since if I had you would have highlighted the error. But, if not, please feel free to explain yourself, rather than bluster and bluff with the idea that "asshat" would pierce me to the core and prove your claim.

Betel wonders, "Tadowe-Do you own an airplane?"

No, but I have a 12 gauge pump shotgun and reloading equipment, in case you mobsters turned fascists take to the streets when you begin starving and trying to get my rice and beans.
However, here is the one you should be talking to about planes, Betel is a nut:
Redlightcreepoid says, "Oh, monster baby I don't make the rules, yousa merely a Jar Jar in mooey complex poo-doo machinery."

One of yours, I believe ...?
#108 | Posted by tadowe at 2010-02-21 12:04 AM

Impossible to consciously know, but if my incredibly massive genius is participating in your paranoia while I sleep, so be it. It's hard enough to paper-train, let alone blog-train. Wow, that does sound like what this petting action is - a blog-train.

You've mentioned your 12-gauge twice now.. I take it that you have something you know I want? Rice and beans is a nice deflection, but you can't defeat my hobocorp - they operate on malt liqueur and are relentless at sniffing out copper. Why, I'll bet your vehicle is fully-metal, like your "heart".

If there does come a time when you could help your neighbor I will assume that you will do it. Besides, when the Iraqi invade you will be scrambling to find one of us gays to translate. Fool! You have fallen directly into what Timbicile has already warned against!! THE GAY AGENDA WILL WIPE CLEAN THE ERROR OF "BREEDING" AND USHER IN A NEW SEASON OF AB-FAB (and a time machine since the series has been ended for what.. over 10 years now?)

hey RiR, why would I want to listen to some bozo claim 9/11 as an inside job because Atta, et al, may have had a beers in few strip joints?

because he was an "islamic fundamentalist"?

yeah, and Ted Haggard was a "good" Christian.

Red says, "You've mentioned your 12-gauge twice now.."

I mentioned 12 gauge shotguns twice, and that I had one, once. I think you're trying to play in the wrong league, Mr. Incoherent.

"I take it that you have something you know I want?"

Do you resemble a mob of party fascists taking to the streets as a mob to pillage and steal because they have run out of the "rich" to pay for their food and shelter and need to take my rice and beans? Give it a try.

"Rice and beans is a nice deflection, but you can't defeat my hobocorp - they operate on malt liqueur and are relentless at sniffing out copper. Why, I'll bet your vehicle is fully-metal, like your "heart"."

Did you say something?

"If there does come a time when you could help your neighbor I will assume that you will do it."

Not if my "neighbor" is a collective mob rampaging because their benefits ran out, I won't.

"Besides, when the Iraqi invade you will be scrambling to find one of us gays to translate."

You want Iraqis to invade and make me watch you translate them as a gay? You are more boorish than even Ray could ever attain to! You *are* some kind of pervert, what?

Wow, Betel, I think maybe you'd better ask if this dimwit of your ilk has an airplane, huh?

#118 | Posted by Zatoichi

LOL! That's a good one. For once.

#120 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2010-02-21 01:44 AM | Reply | Flag:Woulda had a lot more impact if it would have been spelled correctly

meh..still not spelled properly.

Lame....

Exceedingly lame...

Red says, "You've mentioned your 12-gauge twice now.."
I mentioned 12 gauge shotguns twice, and that I had one, once. I think you're trying to play in the wrong league, Mr. Incoherent.

Sopwith spectral sleepytime central flaps down and in with petrol the pacemaker is plastic but the heart is metal even teeth that chatter really r-r-rattle symposium sloppily ridden side-saddle didactic prurient chattel sold half-price to the sultans side-cartel instead of beans and rice translating how your fart smells butt terrorist action doesn't phase smart fellers such as yourself, does it? Shapoopi.

"I take it that you have something you know I want?"
Do you resemble a mob of party fascists taking to the streets as a mob to pillage and steal because they have run out of the "rich" to pay for their food and shelter and need to take my rice and beans? Give it a try.
"Rice and beans is a nice deflection, but you can't defeat my hobocorp - they operate on malt liqueur and are relentless at sniffing out copper. Why, I'll bet your vehicle is fully-metal, like your "heart"."
Did you say something?
"If there does come a time when you could help your neighbor I will assume that you will do it."
Not if my "neighbor" is a collective mob rampaging because their benefits ran out, I won't.

Bullshit. If a natural disaster, terrorism or military invasion happens you will be helping Americans. You bitch a mean game, but I still have a lingering doubt that you are inhuman.

"Besides, when the Iraqi invade you will be scrambling to find one of us gays to translate."
You want Iraqis to invade and make me watch you translate them as a gay? You are more boorish than even Ray could ever attain to! You *are* some kind of pervert, what?
Wow, Betel, I think maybe you'd better ask if this dimwit of your ilk has an airplane, huh?
#115 | Posted by tadowe at 2010-02-21 01:04 AM

[pats head approvingly] You are doing wonderfully. I have no doubt that you will eventually win that game of solitaire!

#129 | Posted by Zatoichi

Gotta admit, you're getting a better quality of subject matter, Zatto...

pix.motivatedphotos.com
#129 | Posted by Zatoichi at 2010-02-21 01:56 AM

What is that on the plate? A nasty-looking salad!?

Okay, so it's not all about meat.. oh, wait.

I particularly enjoyed the Conservatives. "Hey, PEEKABOO!"

You woulda, RLR...you woulda....

Pillowbiter, are ya?

Your opinion isn't the law, Ray. If Ron Paul becomes president (about the time pigs fly) he will continue supporting the NATO action in Afghanistan.

Liberty isn't a law, Tad; it's a principle. Ron Paul is a politician; not a principle.

Conservatism is a matter of constitutional support, and which calls for the federal government to defend the nation. You libertarians want to cower within the boarders of the nation and issue complaints if we're attacked.

In my lifetime, the only threat to the American people is their own government, a government that grows in power through the kind of fear mongering you demonstrate. The enemy is within our borders. I'll continue to resist peacefully.

You're an admitted coward who avoided the draft and refused to defend the nation when the majority felt it necessary. You tried, or forced someone else to bear the burden your precious 'liberty' quailed at doing.

I refuse to support politicians who send send kids to die in senseless wars.

.. and I was the one your ilk spit on, threatened my wife and family while I was at war, and now pretend to be patriotic with your stay at home, poltroonish opinion ...

As I said before, I did not participate in antiwar demonstrations. I am not a patriot, nor do I pretend to be. I live by principles.

No wonder I think you are nothing more than just another moronic Democrat ...

No wonder I consider you an insult to the name "libertarian." There is no more threat to the liberty of a citizen than his own government.

Ray waves hands in a magical pass, "Liberty isn't a law, Tad; it's a principle. Ron Paul is a politician; not a principle."

This dialectic is, well, almost Soviet in its expertness. Are you trained in rhetorical mumbo-jumbo, Ray? While working for NSA, I had to analyse crap like this for almost 2 years.

"In my lifetime, the only threat to the American people is their own government, a government that grows in power through the kind of fear mongering you demonstrate. The enemy is within our borders. I'll continue to resist peacefully."

You're like some homeowner with a shotgun, who is being attacked from afar by a sniper rifle, aren't you? You can only defend yourself if the sniper bothers to come into your domicile. Even buying your own rifle is against your "principle" of cringing cowardice, and you can't send a friend because you don't have any ... "principle", again.

You think your "principles" represent logic, but they only demonstrate that you are as unintelligent as your leftist counterparts. You can't even fall back on the Founding Fathers "intent" because the USA was conducting undeclared military actions, and with the patriotic need to defeat the enemy attacking us, as soon as the French started attacking our shipping, after Adams had defaulted on our Revolutionary war debts to France (the excuse being that the debt was to the defunct monarchy, not the revolutionary government).

Of course, Adams wasn't responsible, since congress manages the finances, but leftists and libertarians will blame him as chief executive, even if he was against the effort by selfish men to stiff France's revolution which had saved their own, in part. (I haven't read whether he was or was not against default ... anyone?)

"I refuse to support politicians who send send kids to die in senseless wars."

That's your excuse, while your effort to avoid the draft placed some fellow America into the danger your cowardly action has an excuse to avoid. And, you think your self-apology gains you rhetorical respect when it actually earns you pity, at best.

"As I said before, I did not participate in antiwar demonstrations. I am not a patriot, nor do I pretend to be. I live by principles."

Your "principles" again? More excuses for acting as the cowardly demonstrators were. You might not have been chanting, but you were supporting their efforts to deny finances for the South Vietnamese millions and also tacitly supporting communist imperialism with your "principled" poltroonery.

I suggest you find another seat at the bar ...

The wildest rant here suggests that Democrats orchestrated the Vietnam war protests to get LBJ out. Yes, and Democrats orchestrated the plane flown into the Austin IRS to show people how looney the protesters really are, maybe spark a "librul" backlash that they can then use to mobilize their own base. herm

ALL Bush, All the time - sounds like a liberal fixation to me. The only thing they have worse is a case case of Palin Derangement Syndrome, with a pinch of Chaney and Rove thrown in for good measure - LOL

Hasn't this clown done enough damage already?

Mr Yoo may want to keep his 'jerk-off fantasies' of wiping out entire villages to himself.

ALL Bush, All the time - sounds like a liberal fixation to me. The only thing they have worse is a case case of Palin Derangement Syndrome, with a pinch of Chaney and Rove thrown in for good measure - LOL

#138 | Posted by MSgt at 2010-02-21 11:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

YEAH!!

WE should be discussing Obama instead, not the actual administration that the subject of the thread worked for!!

MSGT-
Minor gripe, dude, but do you have to misspell Cheney's name every fucking time you type it?

A Government Of,For and By the People!!!

By employing the same reasoning and tactics ...the American people who "are" fundamentally and inherently the Real & Only GOVERNMENT,could legally preempt and eliminate,by any means,the Sham,Traitorous Corporate (so called) Government in Washington!

Sorry, no such authority in the constitution.
Invading afghanistan and iraq, are war crimes, and violate specific constitional authority. Continuation of both hostilities is also a war crime.
Mutual defense treaties violate the constitution, as does any law, whether by definition or intent, that does not meet the measure of inclusion of said law.
There is no authority to liberate any nation, other than the United States of America, and our military involvment, along with the criminal entities of so-called intelligence authority, is flatly illegal.
There is no right of pre-emption, probable cause, reasonable suspicion.
Anything that is denied the citizen, whether in the singular or the aggregate, is illegal to ANY elected or appointed authority.
You see, the constitution specifically states, that no citizen can escape their citizenry, whether it be the potus, congress, scotus. If it is illegal to me, it is illegal to them.
Period.

Tadowe, if you worked for the nsa as you say, you are a fucking criminal under the constitution.
You are the problem, not the solution, you worthless piece of human waste.

You are what is evil and vile in this nation.

The Left: Obama Can Legally Massacre Villages

February 22, 2010
"NATO Air Raiding Villages, Killing civilians"

"Obama: U.S. Troops in Afghanistan Must Do More Than Kill Civilians
Tuesday, August 14, 2007"

Didn't Truman give the order to massacre Hiroshima and Nagasaki?

Wow! If we'd known he had this authority ahead of time we could have had him extradited to the Hague for war crimes before the order was given to drop those bombs!

Stupid Libs get their panties in a bunch for ridiculous things!

#146 that's different. Truman was a Democrat.

Bush could legally massacre a village.

Looks like Big O did his best to beat that"

Bush could legally massacre a village.

Looks like Big O did his best to beat that"

online.wsj.com

#148 | Posted by boojiboy at 2010-02-22 07:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

SpecOps ordering a strike that kills civilians is a far cry from a sitting President claiming he can legally wipe all of them out........but that doesn't help you with your Obama hatred.

Said president never claimed that . . . but that wouldn't help you with your Bush hatred now would it?

I don't hate Obama, I voted for him and I support him.

I just think its interesting how polarized shitheads like yourself would take an article about a former attorney for the Whitehouse and stick his words in a former president's mouth.

well cheney did say yoo and bybee were working with cheney and bush to develope their torture policy so it is not a long stretch between this and bush's mouth. of course w is the masterslacker so cheney's mouth is more apropos

didn't we bomb Japanese and German cities killing hundreds of thousands of people during WWII?

Didn't our military kill twelve civilians in Marjah last week and 27 more in eastern Afghanistan this week?

I don't understand what the issue is... The article doesn't state that Bush the Evil President actually ever ordered the "massacre" of said village.....

Some of you on the left are waaaaaaaaaaaaaayyy over the top today..... Nice False concern for your fellow man on your parts.... Really.... All of you.... Why don't you all fly down to Haiti and help out if you're so damn humane....

Peace Baby....

Know what kills me.... The ones here screaming about throwing Bush in jail will watch a movie like quantum of solace and cheer when James Bond drowns the terrorist in the sink and the toilet in the beginning of the movie...

But the President of your own country can't kill or harm a real fucking terrorist... God Forbid the President and his people actually tried to protect your sorry asses.....