The one and only Obama thread ( continued)

[Mindstorm]

Top Five Ways Obama Is Creating a New Culture of Dependency

By Thomas J. Basile

Roaring toward the 100-day mark President Obama, together with the Democratic leadership, is bringing us the change we were promised. However, change for the sake of change is a dangerous thing in the complex world we live in, and Americans should be wary of the direction we are heading. Recent poll numbers suggest that Americans, in particular independent voters, are realizing that, despite the centrist rhetoric, the president is a devoted apostle of the left. Those independents and even Republicans who had hoped Barack Obama would make good on his pledge to drive a middle course, have spent the last two months watching the president sign the largest special interest giveaway, discretionary spending increase and expansion of government in our history.

What Americans don’t realize is that whatever the pretense, the Democrats are mortgaging our future for the sake of fortifying their stronghold on Washington.

Yes, the era of big government is back, but there is more at work here than just increasing the entitlement rolls. Make no mistake, this expansion of government power and influence is much larger, more calculated, and more political than we’ve seen in decades.

[...]

1. Increasing the Size of the Federal Government Workforce [...]
2. Reducing the Charitable Deduction [...]
3. The National Healthcare Push [...]
4. Tax Cuts for People Who Don’t Pay Taxes [...]
5. Amnesty for Millions of Illegal Immigrants [...]

[...]

It’s time Americans realized that this train is barreling down the tracks. To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson — the government that can give you everything also has the power to take everything from you. After criticizing the Bush administration for years about spending and some supposed massive power grab, the Obama-Pelosi-Reid troika has hit a new low on the hypocrisy meter.

[Mindstorm]

My oh my! How many did they waterboard. I think it was three suspects --which ended in 2003-- and got important information from two of them. And as it has been pointed in this thread a little earlier that the leftists stick up for every totalitarian dictator and their gulags, but are incensed when American officials try to protect America.

Why? Because they hate America.

Obama won't charge CIA officers for rough tactics

By JENNIFER LOVEN and DEVLIN BARRETT, – 42 mins ago

WASHINGTON – In the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, CIA operatives were allowed to shackle, strip and waterboard terror suspects. Now, President Barack Obama has assured these operatives that they will not be prosecuted for their rough interrogation tactics.

At the same time, Obama's attorney general offered the operatives legal help if anyone else takes them to court over the harsh interrogation methods that were approved by the Bush administration.

more ...

[Steed]

Birds of a feather flock together:





Source here.

Steed

[The Cat]

In your paranoid frenzy, you've got it all upside down.

you have outed yourself as a leftist loon a long time ago.

You're the one quoting David Horowitz and frontpagemag, how's that!

the leftists stick up for every totalitarian dictator and their gulags, but are incensed
when American officials try to protect America. Why? Because they hate America.

Behind your 'leftist' paranoid labeling, what you truly despise are the American people: the Constitutional We-The-People!

And... This is the 'Corporate America' you cherish (those not abiding to its Rule Of Law):

Report Calls CIA Detainee Treatment 'Inhuman', by Joby Warrick and Julie Tate
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... id=topnews

Medical officers who oversaw interrogations of terrorism suspects in CIA secret prisons committed gross violations of medical ethics and in some cases essentially participated in torture, the International Committee of the Red Cross concluded in a confidential report that labeled the CIA program "inhuman." Health personnel offered supervision and even assistance as suspected al-Qaeda operatives were beaten, deprived of food, exposed to temperature extremes and subjected to waterboarding, the relief agency said in the 2007 report, a copy of which was posted on a magazine Web site yesterday. The report quoted one medical official as telling a detainee: "I look after your body only because we need you for information." (...)

The confidential report sheds additional light on the CIA's handling of the detainees, who were held in secret overseas prisons for up to four years and subjected to what the agency describes as "enhanced interrogation techniques." In addition to widely reported methods such as waterboarding, the report alleges that several of the detainees were forced to stand for days in painful positions with their arms shackled overhead. One prisoner reported being shackled in this manner for "two to three months, seven days of prolonged stress standing followed by two days of being able to sit or lie down."

In addition to the coercive methods -- which the ICRC said "amounted to torture" and a violation of U.S. and international treaty obligations -- the report said detainees were routinely threatened with further violence against themselves and their families. Nine of the 14 prisoners said they were threatened with "electric shocks, infection with HIV, sodomy of the detainee and . . . being brought close to death," it said. (...)

Previously, top Bush administration officials defended the interrogation methods, saying they were legal and necessary to prevent terrorist attacks. The report's release puts added pressure on the Obama administration, which has banned the use of waterboarding and similar techniques but has resisted calls to conduct legal inquiries to determine whether Bush administration officials broke laws.

The Bush Six to Be Indicted, by Scott Horton.
http://digg.com/d1oeJq

Spanish prosecutors have decided to press forward with a criminal investigation targeting former U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales and five top associates over their role in the torture of five Spanish citizens held at Guantánamo, several reliable sources close to the investigation have told The Daily Beast. Their decision is expected to be announced on Tuesday before the Spanish central criminal court, the Audencia Nacional, in Madrid. But the decision is likely to raise concerns with the human-rights community on other points: They will seek to have the case referred to a different judge. (...)

The six defendants—in addition to Gonzales, Federal Appeals Court Judge and former Assistant Attorney General Jay Bybee, University of California law professor and former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, former Defense Department general counsel and current Chevron lawyer William J. Haynes II, Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff David Addington, and former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith—are accused of having given the green light to the torture and mistreatment of prisoners held in U.S. detention in “the war on terror.” The case arises in the context of a pending proceeding before the court involving terrorism charges against five Spaniards formerly held at Guantánamo. A group of human-rights lawyers originally filed a criminal complaint asking the court to look at the possibility of charges against the six American lawyers. (...)

The reaction on American editorial pages is divided—some questioning sharply why the Obama administration is not conducting an investigation, which is implicitly the question raised by the Spanish prosecutors. Publications loyal to the Bush team argue that the Spanish investigation is an “intrusion” into American affairs, even when those affairs involve the torture of five Spaniards on Cuba.

The Bush Six labored at length to create a legal black hole in which they could implement their policies safe from the scrutiny of American courts and the American media. Perhaps they achieved much of their objective, but the law of unintended consequences has kicked in. If U.S. courts and prosecutors will not address the matter because of a lack of jurisdiction, foreign courts appear only too happy to step in.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03911.html

By repudiating the memos, the Obama administration has again seized the high ground and restored some of the honor lost over the past few years. President Obama's actions not only restore confidence that this country will not torture, but he has also strengthened the nation's moral authority in condemning these heinous acts wherever they occur.

Videos:
Obama has to prosecute war crimes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGd7SImLnEw
Keith Olbermann: Bush Must be Prosecuted
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hOBbunLBW9w
UN may prosecute Bush administration
http://vodpod.com/watch/1308220-officia ... ush-cheney

[Mindstorm]

In your paranoid frenzy, you've got it all upside down.

you have outed yourself as a leftist loon a long time ago.

You're the one quoting David Horowitz and frontpagemag, how's that!

I am indeed. Not only is he outing the communists in the USA he is outing all you leftists who march lock step with the Islamists.

[Psycho Bunny]

Not only is he outing the communists in the USA he is outing all you leftists who march lock step with the Islamists.

A while back you asked why I seemed to point out only the ad hominem insults of "one side" on this thread. You are here accusing Cat as being a "leftist who marches lock step with the Islamists."

Now why did The Cat join this site, long before you arrived here and started to define who is right and who is not-right? He is opposed to Islam.

Something you and your friends here seem to forget. This site is against Islam. If someone is left, centre or right should be irrelevant.

But once you start accusing a long-term member of working with Islamists, you have become the enemy within. This is not what the site was built upon, and this goes far beyond mere "ad hominem" into the realms of slander and dishonesty.

This is deliberately abusing another member.

[Mindstorm]

Not only is he outing the communists in the USA he is outing all you leftists who march lock step with the Islamists.

A while back you asked why I seemed to point out only the ad hominem insults of "one side" on this thread. You are here accusing Cat as being a "leftist who marches lock step with the Islamists."

And a while back I told you to stop the hypocrisy. Why don't you go join stormfront.

[Psycho Bunny]

Not only is he outing the communists in the USA he is outing all you leftists who march lock step with the Islamists.

A while back you asked why I seemed to point out only the ad hominem insults of "one side" on this thread. You are here accusing Cat as being a "leftist who marches lock step with the Islamists."

And a while back I told you to stop the hypocrisy. Why don't you go join stormfront.

You did not have the openness to state that I should stop any hypocrisy, even after I questioned you. You just made a veiled tangential comment, refusing to be direct.

If I am hypocritical, show me.

And you think I should belong to Stormfront? More ad hominem slander, unrelated to truth. To Pragmatits am a leftist Obama-lover, and you suggest I am a Nazi.

Your political perceptions must be really hyper-acute, if you can spot these tendencies so easily. Which should make anyone look at your postings with a renewed respect for their acumen and insight.

[Mindstorm]

Now, hopefully you have read my last post before this one comes out. The Cat and some of his fellow travelers have made constant references to "racism" when you don't agree with Obama. Other posters have used some other derogatory terms -- silence from you as usual.

Second, how did you like the stormfront comment?

The Cat is always making reference to stormfront -- including, acting like an child, and doctoring my username to "Mindstorm-front" or a variation of -- as long as strom and front is used when he is addressing my posts.

Do I see you jumping out of your chair in indignation -- no I don't.

So calling him a leftist who I think marches with the Islamists -- is okay in my books. Do you want a little more harmony? Then stop reading this thread or stop playing cop who is on the take.

Well, I guess my first line is for naught.

[Mindstorm]

Now if you want to play good/bad guy -- then that is your business. For me, you need to stop your one-sided bullcrap throughout the whole forum.

[Psycho Bunny]

So calling him a leftist who I think marches with the Islamists -- is okay in my books. Do you want a little more harmony? Then stop reading this thread or stop playing cop who is on the take.

On the take? Even a weak analogy has to have an innuendo attached.

[Psycho Bunny]

Now if you want to play good/bad guy -- then that is your business. For me, you need to stop your one-sided bullcrap throughout the whole forum.

I may be one-sided, but that is hardly a crime. If I were any other way, I would be called "two-faced".

But I am providing one-sided bullcrap throughout the whole forum? I was not aware that you ever got out of this thread to examine any other parts of the forum.

[Mindstorm]

I may be one-sided, but that is hardly a crime. If I were any other way, I would be called "two-faced".

Nay, you would be called -- fair.

[Mindstorm]

I was not aware that you ever got out of this thread to examine any other parts of the forum.

Really? That just proves you don't get out in different threads.

[Psycho Bunny]

I may be one-sided, but that is hardly a crime. If I were any other way, I would be called "two-faced".

Nay, you would be called -- fair.

I am hardly being "unfair" - I rarely read the comments here as this thread is too full of copy/pastes. When I do make any observations, all manner of insults and accusations come at me. I see no voices defending me - so I have no loyalties here. I just respond to what I see when I drop by to look for some proper and insightful posts. And that usually involves insults of the sort I get subjected to here, usually thrown by the same culprits.

I speak as I find. If someone is being rude, I point it out. I am not going to wade through pages of copy/paste to find some comment that redeems the same people who have previously given me insults or slander.

[Mindstorm]

I may be one-sided, but that is hardly a crime. If I were any other way, I would be called "two-faced".

Nay, you would be called -- fair.

I am hardly being "unfair" - I rarely read the comments here as this thread is too full of copy/pastes. When I do make any observations, all manner of insults and accusations come at me. I see no voices defending me - so I have no loyalties here. I just respond to what I see when I drop by to look for some proper and insightful posts. And that usually involves insults of the sort I get subjected to here, usually thrown by the same culprits.

I speak as I find. If someone is being rude, I point it out. I am not going to wade through pages of copy/paste to find some comment that redeems the same people who have previously given me insults or slander.

Good for you.

When I see someone is being rude to me -- I let them know in my response.

[Mindstorm]

Obama flunks on social pathology

By James Lewis
April 17, 2009

Social pathology: crack and heroin epidemics, family violence, out-of-wedlock births, abortion as "just another option," alcoholic mothers having brain-damaged babies, violent and uncontrollable schools, constantly irresponsible and self-destructive behavior, endemic crime. Obama has seen that for twenty years in South Side Chicago, and it is well-established that social pathology is directly responsible for the failure of the "structurally poor" to rise out of their misery.

Obama seems to be in denial of the obvious. His own life is entirely middle class. Married, career-oriented, successful, steadily rising income, two daughters born in his marriage. Yes, Obama has a lot of dubious ideological friends. J-Wright's Trinity United Church claims to be against "middleclassness" -- which is all the good and healthy habits that keep people out of poverty. But in fact the Obamas are a perfect example of middleclassness.

As the charismatic hero of the Left, Obama could be teaching, teaching all these obvious rules of behavior, which have worked so well over two centuries since the Industrial Revolution, to bring people out of poverty. Just like Jesse Jackson could be teaching healthy lifestyles, instead of blackmailing corporations. They know exactly what's going on. They know, just like white liberals, what works in their own lives. But they will not draw the obvious conclusions: That would be "conservative." Almost a kind of treason to the sacred doctrine of state control.

Every liberal policy stance is infected by that bottomless chasm of hypocrisy. We all know what works to help people grow out of poverty, because most of us have practiced those habits in our own lives. But strengthening the family, keeping fathers and mothers responsible for their kids, much stricter discipline in the schools, postponing immediate payoffs for long term goals, avoiding destructive life choices -- all those standards, habits and customs that helped the whole industrialized world rise from poverty, are simply denied by the Left. It's mighty strange. Today we can see those habits of hard work and "middleclassness" revolutionizing billions of people in China and India, as they visibly rise out of centuries of misery and poverty. It's right in front of our eyes!

But that lesson is never, ever learned by the Left.

The biggest question to ask liberals is: Why don't you support those solutions that have worked so well in your own life?

It is hard to avoid the feeling that the Left is endemically racist and classist: That they have simply decided that what works in their own lives will never work to raise poor blacks, Hispanics and whites out of poverty.

If that's not true, I would like to hear from liberals: Why don't you just encourage all the people you feel sorry for to adopt those work and life habits that made your own friends and families successful?

I'm ready to hear the answer.

Do I hear anything?

... Hello? Hello?

[THHuxley]

Usurper Barack Obama has signed an executive order presidential determination allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to settle in the United Statesat American taxpayers' expense. .

No he has not. You guys are too stupid to even read simple English.

[Psycho Bunny]

Usurper Barack Obama has signed an executive order presidential determination allowing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians to settle in the United Statesat American taxpayers' expense. .

No he has not. You guys are too stupid to even read simple English.

Sorry Mr H - but I do not understand. Is the article Mr P quoted wrong? Maybe I cannot read....

[piggy]

.

Usurper Obama Will Punish Israel if it Attacks Iran
by DefendUSx April 18, 2009 07:56

Report from The Obama File.

Comment: Obama is an agent of Islam. He has helped Iran by funneling money to the regime as US Senator through Iranian front Organizations. Now, his Technology staff is filled with those in a position to conviently "leak" sensitive technology to Iran, along with "tip-offs". Obama and Iran aren't even good actors, pretending to be in opposition to each other.

Obama has taken military action against Iran off the table, and now he is considering ways of punishing Israel if it attacks Iran to end its nuclear arms program (and prevent a second Holocaust).

In other words, having failed to contain Iran, the Obama is concentrating on restraining Israel.

Administration contingency plans include condemnation of Israel, support for a United Nations Security Council resolution that could include sanctions on Israel, and suspending or seriously cutting military aid to the Jewish State.

One of Obama's closest foreign policy advisers, National Security Council member Samantha Power, is a proponent of ending military aid to Israel in order to force it to negotiate with Iran's Palestinian Islamist proxy, Hamas, and withdraw from all lands taken during the Six-Day War of June 1967. Power also advocates shifting aid to a Palestinian state. Overall, she views Israel as a liability and a historic mistake, in line with the European left position (and that of old-line, right-of-center, American isolationists and anti-Semites). Her antidemocratic admirers in the Democratic Party's (Hillary-hating) left wing agree and are eager for an opportunity to paint Israel as a Jewish North Korea (although they actually have more sympathy for North Korea than for Israel).

The big question is how the Obama administration would react if Iran retaliated against Israel indirectly as well as directly -- by making good on its repeated threats to attack U.S. forces in the Middle East and shut down the strategic, 29 mile-wide Strait of Hormuz, through which an estimated 20% of the world's crude oil is transported by tanker ships. Would the U.S. fight back with real ferocity or respond in a limited way while blaming Israel for preemptively attacking Iran and appealing to "the Muslim world" for "understanding?"

One wonders how the Apologizer-in-Chief would react.

Related: The Israeli military is preparing itself to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran's nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead by its new government.

Among the steps taken to ready Israeli forces for what would be a risky raid requiring pinpoint aerial strikes are the acquisition of three Airborne Warning and Control (AWAC) aircraft and regional missions to simulate the attack.

Two nationwide civil defense drills will help to prepare the public for the retaliation that Israel could face.

http://www.repubx.com/

.