Newt Gingrich or Barack Obama?

[QuantumPion]

This is incorrect on all counts. The prosecution of war crimes has nothing to do with the world court. As a signatory to the Nuremberg Principles (the US wrote them) the US is obligated to prosecute war crimes. The invasion of Iraq was a war of aggression, an enumerated war crime (Crimes Against Peace, Principle VI.a.1) under the Nuremberg Principles and Bush and his gang of weirdos are war criminals.

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

You are aware that it was Iraq that originally invaded Kuwait, correct? And we only invaded Iraq to defend their neighbors whom are our allies? How you call that a war of aggression on our part, I'll never know. That sure is some twisted logic.

 

[thraashman]

You are aware that it was Iraq that originally invaded Kuwait, correct? And we only invaded Iraq to defend their neighbors whom are our allies? How you call that a war of aggression on our part, I'll never know. That sure is some twisted logic.

That would be true if he were referring to H.W. Bush, the elder. The Iraq war part 2, now starring George W. Bush was not in response to an Iraq invasion and was very much a war of aggression.

 

[yllus]

Gingrich shut down Government, rather than give up his principles.

And won.

Nuff said.

-John

That's exactly what America needs (again) - someone who chooses ideology over pragmatism.

 

[Vic Vega]

They'll vote for anyone but Obama. The devil himself could put an R next to his name and the repubs would vote for him over Obama.

Don't kid yourself into thinking it's just Republicans.

The entire centrist base wants Mr. Obama out. Bury your head in the sand all you like. It's going to happen.

 

[Vic Vega]

Obama supporters supposedly hate corporate ownership of government, secretive government programs, lobbyists, and all that... Yet they'll still vote for the man who has embraced all of that to a degree never before seen. This is a fact. What gives?

Don't be bringing that logic and reason here, they don't want it.

 

[werepossum]

That's exactly what America needs (again) - someone who chooses ideology over pragmatism.

Since that resulted in a rapidly balanced budget whereas Clinton's budgets had projected deficits for ever after, I agree, that's exactly what America needs (again.) I just don't like it packaged in Newt.

 

[Obsoleet]

Eliminating the bloated US military system is the last thing the ruling elite will allow. It is at the core of their money making systems and the handlers of the money making systems rule all in the US and have for a very long time. Read what the genuinely socialist Eguene Debs had to say about the US in 1918 and tell me what has changed about his core observation:

"They tell us that we live in a great free republic; that our institutions are democratic; that we are a free and self-governing people. This is too much, even for a joke. But it is not a subject for levity; it is an exceedingly serious matter. ”

“These are the gentry who are today wrapped up in the American flag, who shout their claim from the housetops that they are the only patriots, and who have their magnifying glasses in hand, scanning the country for evidence of disloyalty, eager to apply the brand of treason to the men who dare to even whisper their opposition to Junker rule in the United Sates. No wonder Sam Johnson declared that “patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.” He must have had this Wall Street gentry in mind, or at least their prototypes, for in every age it has been the tyrant, the oppressor and the exploiter who has wrapped himself in the cloak of patriotism, or religion, or both to deceive and overawe the people.”

“Every solitary one of these aristocratic conspirators and would-be murderers claims to be an arch-patriot; every one of them insists that the war is being waged to make the world safe for democracy. What humbug! What rot! What false pretense! These autocrats, these tyrants, these red-handed robbers and murderers, the “patriots,” while the men who have the courage to stand face to face with them, speak the truth, and fight for their exploited victims—they are the disloyalists and traitors. If this be true, I want to take my place side by side with the traitors in this fight. ”

“The feudal barons of the Middle Ages, the economic predecessors of the capitalists of our day, declared all wars. And their miserable serfs fought all the battles. The poor, ignorant serfs had been taught to revere their masters; to believe that when their masters declared war upon one another, it was their patriotic duty to fall upon one another and to cut one another’s throats for the profit and glory of the lords and barons who held them in contempt.”

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article29638.htm

War mongering, war profiteering and money laundering continues to be the beating heart of the US economy 100 years later. Nothing has changed or will be allowed to change. See the illegal crackdown on the Occupy movements. Any attempt at genuine reform and genuine democracy will be dealt with harshly.

So the choice given you is, and will always be, between a Newt and an Obama, between pointless choice A or pointless choice B. Unless you actually manage to reform to a real democracy. Good luck.

I really liked that last quote. I like this Eugene Debs guy too. I'm going to look into him more. Though I wouldn't say I'm a real socialist, if he was, as I believe in capitalism for most markets. Socialism is the way for many things where the profit incentive cannot be reliably pointed towards the common good. Health insurance, the food supply, and a few other markets where free markets have, and will likely always fail society.

 

[cybrsage]

There is no "illegal crackdown" of people who assemble without a permit and refuse to leave after being evicted.

 

[werepossum]

Don't kid yourself into thinking it's just Republicans.

The entire centrist base wants Mr. Obama out. Bury your head in the sand all you like. It's going to happen.

Only problem is that the entire centrist base has to agree on someone they want IN more than they want Obama OUT. That is a nontrivial problem.

 

[Obsoleet]

There is no "illegal crackdown" of people who assemble without a permit and refuse to leave after being evicted.

It's bullshit to breakup any peaceful protest and anyone with some common sense knows that.

Just as everyone knows smoking weed shouldn't end you up in prison with violent criminals, there's no sensible reason to end a peaceful protest in public space, trying to bring awareness to an issue. Other than to be a piece of shit.

 

[werepossum]

It's bullshit to breakup any peaceful protest and anyone with some common sense knows that.

Just as everyone knows smoking weed shouldn't end you up in prison with violent criminals, there's no sensible reason to end a peaceful protest in public space, trying to bring awareness to an issue. Other than to be a piece of shit.

So in your mind it's perfectly okay to have some hard-working people denied the ability to do their perfectly legal jobs by some other people who wouldn't accept a job if you wrapped it in weed and tied it with hemp for as long as the hippies want to be there?

EDIT: To be honest, I'm not thrilled by Wall Street either. The difference is that I'm not out interfering with their ability to earn a living, just as I'm not interfering with the hippies' right to play bongos, smoke weed, wave signs and leach off their parents - just as long as they do it without interfering with others' rights and privileges. Put them in a walled compound with no outside resources for security, sanitation, etc. and I'm happy to let them stay there for eternity, but they have no right to force others to subsidize their own sloth.

 

[Obsoleet]

So in your mind it's perfectly okay to have some hard-working people denied the ability to do their perfectly legal jobs by some other people who wouldn't accept a job if you wrapped it in weed and tied it with hemp for as long as the hippies want to be there?

EDIT: To be honest, I'm not thrilled by Wall Street either. The difference is that I'm not out interfering with their ability to earn a living, just as I'm not interfering with the hippies' right to play bongos, smoke weed, wave signs and leach off their parents - just as long as they do it without interfering with others' rights and privileges. Put them in a walled compound with no outside resources for security, sanitation, etc. and I'm happy to let them stay there for eternity, but they have no right to force others to subsidize their own sloth.

I live 3 blocks from a very large Occupy movement and I dont see them ever block anyone getting to work.
The rest of your description about being sloths and so forth I don't really find necessary just as I didn't paint the Wall Street crooks as well... legalized shiftless criminals, who leech off of the remains of an economy that was truly based on manufacturing real goods and services.

I see the "sloths" another way, that a protestor is like a worker, just a little more critical of a building block in society. Taking their most important civic duty seriously and acting on it.

We need less money-handlers, and more producers of real goods and services. Talk to your Jesus about that.

 

[werepossum]

I live 3 blocks from a very large Occupy movement and I dont see them ever block anyone getting to work.
The rest of your description about being sloths and so forth I don't really find necessary just as I didn't paint the Wall Street crooks as well... legalized shiftless criminals, who leech off of the remains of an economy that was truly based on manufacturing real goods and services.

I see the "sloths" another way, that a protestor is like a worker, just a little more critical of a building block in society. Taking their most important civic duty seriously and acting on it.

We need less money-handlers, and more producers of real goods and services. Talk to your Jesus about that.

I agree completely that we need fewer money-handlers, and more producers of real goods and services, although to my knowledge "my Jesus" is not overly fond of money handlers anyway. I don't see much producing going on with the OWS crowd though, just a whole lot of consuming and then throwing the garbage in the street. (In all fairness, I imagine the discarded garbage does reduce the chances of stepping in their shit.) And demanding that other people give them free stuff is "taking their most important civic duty seriously and acting on it"? WTF? That makes small children our most responsible citizens.

Note for future reference: A worker works, by definition. Occupiers by definition don't work (which would seriously interfere with their occupying), they merely demand that others work to provide them free goods and services. Or in other words, ticks demanding a bigger slice of dog.

 

[K1052]

Only problem is that the entire centrist base has to agree on someone they want IN more than they want Obama OUT. That is a nontrivial problem.

They have and it's Chris Christie. Or was it Sarah Palin. Or Michelle Bachmann. Or Herman Cain. Or Newt.

oh fuck just nominate Romney and get it over with.

 

[Obsoleet]

I agree completely that we need fewer money-handlers, and more producers of real goods and services, although to my knowledge "my Jesus" is not overly fond of money handlers anyway. I don't see much producing going on with the OWS crowd though, just a whole lot of consuming and then throwing the garbage in the street.

Having attended a Occupy rally for a short time myself, I heard them asking people to come more often, that the numbers were thin during the working hours. I'm guessing, this is due to them being exactly what you're accusing them of not beingroductive.
I'm guessing you will proceed to explain it's because they can't get out of bed in the morning.

(In all fairness, I imagine the discarded garbage does reduce the chances of stepping in their shit.)
And demanding that other people give them free stuff is "taking their most important civic duty seriously and acting on it"? WTF? That makes small children our most responsible citizens.
Note for future reference: A worker works, by definition. Occupiers by definition don't work (which would seriously interfere with their occupying), they merely demand that others work to provide them free goods and services. Or in other words, ticks demanding a bigger slice of dog.

I'm definitely against littering, but a little trash and some turds floating down a river are a far cry from all the humanbeings Wall Street's actions have thrown out into the street. The Occupy people I've stopped to speak with were -very- intelligent compared to the average person, and I'm guessing the average Occupy protestor is on average more intelligent than 90% of this forum. Very well-read, very articulate.

I'm also not sure in your last point that they are demanding free goods and services. From the few rallies I stopped by while out on a weekend, they were talking more about accountability of an irresponsible sector of our economy.
I'm not sure you are objectively viewing the movement, nor spent a lot of time genuinely considering their efforts by spending even a few minutes with an Occupy movement.

 

[werepossum]

They have and it's Chris Christie. Or was it Sarah Palin. Or Michelle Bachmann. Or Herman Cain. Or Newt.

oh fuck just nominate Romney and get it over with.

Works for me, I like Romney. He's anything and everything I want him to be, even if I change my mind. He agrees with every position I take, plus he admires me as a person. He likes fifty state versions of full health coverage (some of which might actually work, who knows) rather than one huge federal bureaucracy, he has Presidential hair, I've never seen him mistake a window for a door, he can speak without being TelePrompted, and he's fiscally conservative and socially libertarian. Plus, I hear he has magic underwear. That's gotta be worth something. If Obama had magic underwear, it surely would have absorbed some of the suck. (There must be a reason Obama doesn't have magic underwear, and I think I've narrowed it down. It obviously interferes with either golf, or fundraising, or killing Usama bin Ladin.)

 

[werepossum]

Having attended a Occupy rally for a short time myself, I heard them asking people to come more often, that the numbers were thin during the working hours. I'm guessing, this is due to them being exactly what you're accusing them of not beingroductive.
I'm guessing you will proceed to explain it's because they can't get out of bed in the morning.



I'm definitely against littering, but a little trash and some turds floating down a river are a far cry from all the humanbeings Wall Street's actions have thrown out into the street. The Occupy people I've stopped to speak with were -very- intelligent compared to the average person, and I'm guessing the average Occupy protestor is on average more intelligent than 90% of this forum. Very well-read, very articulate.

I'm also not sure in your last point that they are demanding free goods and services. From the few rallies I stopped by while out on a weekend, they were talking more about accountability of an irresponsible sector of our economy.
I'm not sure you are objectively viewing the movement, nor spent a lot of time genuinely considering their efforts by spending even a few minutes with an Occupy movement.

The only way I'm ever going to spend even a few minutes with an Occupier is if she's particularly hot and I can get up wind of her. I have little patience with anyone who waves signs and chants, not even Tea Partiers, who at least pay their own way and clean up after themselves.

 

[Obsoleet]

You're better suited for Iran than the USA then. Like most of the American right.

 

[werepossum]

You're better suited for Iran than the USA then. Like most of the American right.

Perhaps you haven't noticed, but Iran is sign-waving, chanting central.

 

[K1052]

Works for me, I like Romney. He's anything and everything I want him to be, even if I change my mind. He agrees with every position I take, plus he admires me as a person. He likes fifty state versions of full health coverage (some of which might actually work, who knows) rather than one huge federal bureaucracy, he has Presidential hair, I've never seen him mistake a window for a door, he can speak without being TelePrompted, and he's fiscally conservative and socially libertarian. Plus, I hear he has magic underwear. That's gotta be worth something. If Obama had magic underwear, it surely would have absorbed some of the suck. (There must be a reason Obama doesn't have magic underwear, and I think I've narrowed it down. It obviously interferes with either golf, or fundraising, or killing Usama bin Ladin.)

Politics 101...flexibility in the face of adversity (or general stupidity combined with a dash of fringe religious beliefs and a major lack of discretion).

 

[Obsoleet]

Perhaps you haven't noticed, but Iran is sign-waving, chanting central.

I'm going to go out on a limb, and assume your real-world experience in Iran is about as extensive as your visits to an Occupy rally.

 

[werepossum]

I'm going to go out on a limb, and assume your real-world experience in Iran is about as extensive as your visits to an Occupy rally.

That's not a limb, that's the highway.

I avoid ALL shrill, sign waving, chanting groups. I avoid all groups burning the American flag, or shitting on it. I avoid all groups advocating the abolition of capitalism. For that matter, I avoid all people who habitually shit in the street or otherwise practice bad personal hygiene. Notice the similarities here?

Speaking loudly in unison is NOT the sign of intelligence, and certainly not the sign of someone with someone interesting, insightful or useful to say.

 

[QuantumPion]

That would be true if he were referring to H.W. Bush, the elder. The Iraq war part 2, now starring George W. Bush was not in response to an Iraq invasion and was very much a war of aggression.

You are aware of course of the cease fire agreement between the United States and Iraq in 1991, yes? Iraq War 2 was in response to Saddam repeatedly and consistently violating the terms of the cease fire agreement from the first war.

Of course you also know that it was the United Nations which authorized the use of force against Saddam, what, 19 times over 10 years? Hence why Clinton launched several attacks against him in the mid-90's, right?

 

[cybrsage]

It's bullshit to breakup any peaceful protest and anyone with some common sense knows that.

Not true. Let us assume 100 people all camped out on your parents' property. Pooping all over the grass, peeing on the walk, writing graphitti on the walls of their house. I am going to make an assumption that your parents will not be happy about it and call the cops to remove them.

If they all are sitting there peacefully when the cops arrive, are the cops support to let them stay?

Just as everyone knows smoking weed shouldn't end you up in prison with violent criminals, there's no sensible reason to end a peaceful protest in public space, trying to bring awareness to an issue. Other than to be a piece of shit.

Wait, are you saying people who break the law should not be punished according to the law they broke?

 

[cybrsage]

You are aware of course of the cease fire agreement between the United States and Iraq in 1991, yes? Iraq War 2 was in response to Saddam repeatedly and consistently violating the terms of the cease fire agreement from the first war.

Of course you also know that it was the United Nations which authorized the use of force against Saddam, what, 19 times over 10 years? Hence why Clinton launched several attacks against him in the mid-90's, right?

He knows all this, he just does not care about what really happened. NO WAR FOR OIL unless you are Obama and the war is in Libya.