Web Search powered by Yahoo! SEARCH
You're right. President Obama isn't stupid, YOU are.
You are clearly an intellectual pygmy. We sent military aid to Saddam Hussein under Saint Reagan. We have provided military aid to people who have become our enemies many times over in our history because it was perceived to be in our then current national interests. Egypt got aid under Murbarak because he was honoring the treaty with Israel. Reagan, Bush 41, Clinton and Bush 43 did the same thing.
As for "he is not one of us" that's just more birther garbage based upon your own racism.
Chuck Hagel is extremely qualified to be Secretary of Defense but you are so enmeshed in the Tea Party/ Fox News bubble that you know nothing of the real world. Demeaning Kerry's purple heart demeans the U.S. military which made the decision and smacks of the swift boating of John Kerry in 2004, which was proven to be all lies. John McCain has endorsed Kerry and his nomination sailed through the Senate.
So you believe that the Constitution is flawless. Was it flawless when it approved slavery? Was it flawless when it approved segregation? Was it flawless when it denied voting rights for women? If its authors thought it was flawless, they would not have included an amendment process.
Bush 43 used recess appointments over a hundred times during his administration, including appointing John Bolton as UN Ambassador. Virtually every President has used recess appointments. The appellate court's decision is just one step. The Supreme Court will make the final decision.
I would say to you that Barack Obama has never violated the first amendment. Rather he is following the principles of Thomas Jefferson, George Washington, John Adams and more who opposed any religious interference in civil society by guaranteeing freedom from religion as well as freedom to worship as one chooses as long as such worship doesn't interfere with the civil rights of other citizens, such as denying publicly guaranteed rights to private citizens, such as refusing to provide coverage for contraception because of the religious institution's or company's beliefs. If religious providers want to deny civil rights because of their beliefs, let them give up their Federal tax exemption, and use that money to provide those benefits.
No one is violating the 2nd Amendment, which calls for "a well regulated" militia. You can keep your guns, although in your case you may not have the mental capacity to avoid hurting yourself, you just need to register it like you register your car. You did register your car, right?
The President of the United States is not only one of us, he was elected and re-elected by the people of the United States of America. He won the election by 5 million votes, a larger margin than any candidate since Reagan's victory over Mondale in 1984. It turns out that YOU are not one of us.
Let's be honest here. Your principal problem with President Barack Obama is that, after four years in office, he's still black.
Apparently your dedication to the principles of the Constitution ends when the free electorate opposes the tripe in which you believe.
Holy cow! Really? Mitt Romney did nothing for the last 7 years but run for President. He gave up nothing. The tax returns he released showed he made $20 million a year while he ran for President.
He called "terrorism" whatever polling data told him potential voters wanted to hear.
He slandered half the population of the country and pandered to bigots, religious extremists and billionaires.
The election was clear and demonstrative. President Obama won decisively and the American people have spoken. Romney is a man with no core values beyond the belief that he should have been elected President. His views on virtually every subject changed with the prevailing political winds. After the election he made comments that were demeaning to most of the electorate. I should note that the President won both the popular and electoral vote, convincingly. He won all but one of the so-called swing states, including Florida, where the Republican Party did everything in its power to suppress turnout among voters who were likely to vote for the President.
Now the Republicans are talking about changing their messaging when they should be talking about their message. If they focus on the messaging, they are fated to be a smaller and smaller factor in American life. More than anyone, the Republicans should remember the Whig Party, from whence they came, and learn what it means to become marginalized. Of course as a liberal Democrat, I hope they keep on doing what they have been doing, so, never mind.
President Obama prevailed because he addressed the concerns of the majority of Americans. It was just that simple. Your attitudes and bigotry are the reason why Democrats are likely to make increased gains in the years to come. As for you, my father always said, "There are more horses a---- than horses." You prove that every time you write.
Part of the negative reaction to the so-called "Christian Right" is the result of the fact that most Americans don't want religion in their civic lives. The imposition of Christianity on civil society is directly contradictory to the founding principles of country.
For a different view, read this article. You will have to copy and past the link into your browser. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/opi...
Where to begin? Let's start with Mr. Willoughby. Not knowing the details of his detention, I suspect that he was the victim of police over zealousness as has been the case too often in this country. Civil rights demonstrators in the south in the 50's and 60's were hit with fire hoses and beaten. Viet Name War protesters were similarly harassed. It's an old story, though not a good one. Frankly, I don't care what Mr. Willoughby was protesting, it behooves civil authorities to protect those who choose to dissent publicly. Some such demonstrations are designed to get participants arrested as a further emphasis of their cause.
Finally, Scott Walker is no hero, nor is he a villain. He is a politician, like his opponent. There is only one truth in politics: re-election. Today it takes an enormous ego to willingly subject oneself to the rigors of the political gauntlet candidates must run to gain access to the halls of power.
The Roberts Court has been the most activist court in the last 50 years overturning a century of settled law with Citizens United and so many more. The block of right wing appointees have been very unified in its desire to advance a conservative agenda. Having said that, I agree that they have acted well within their prerogative. The Warren Court was a moderate/liberal court and it too was activist. To accuse one group of Justices of being ill-suited because it does what it believes to be proper while praising another because it does what it believes to be proper is just silly. I should also point out that, while the 5-4 decisions have been tough, most of the decisions this court has made have not been 5-4.
The authors of the U.S. Constitution were all rich white men. They developed a method of governance based largely on the writings of John Locke, and Englishman and Thomas Jefferson's acknowledged inspiration. The document was a reflection of the enlightenment period. The French revolution was motivated by the same thinking.
The authors fought to protect their own rights and wealth. Some, like Alexander Hamilton, a constitutional monarchist, John Adams, a skilled negotiator whose principles were a little wishy washy, Jefferson, a wealthy slave owner, gentleman farmer and agriculturalist and Benjamin Franklin, a philosopher, writer, inventor and bon vivant, were best at rising above their personal interests, but the rest of the group were motivated by self interest.
This imperfect conglomeration of people did a brilliant job of finding a way to create a national government to rise out of the disastrous ashes of the Articles of Confederation, but they were not super-heroes nor uniquely brilliant, just realists. The Electoral College was created to protect against the rise of charismatic tyrants and to placate those, like Hamilton, who would have preferred a constitutional monarchy. Slavery was preserved to hold the south in the union counting each slave as 3/5 of a person for purposes of political apportionment. The Senate was created to hold small states who believed that the House of Representatives, where population dictated representation, would leave them subject to the whims of the large, populous states. Further, Senators were elected by state legislatures to ensure that the public would not run amuck by selecting people who were not supportive of the established power structure. Women had no rights at all. There are numerous other examples of such politically motivated compromises.
These men understood that the world would change over time and that failure to permit the system to be changed would most assuredly prove fatal to the nation, thus the amendment process was developed.
The United States is not the Constitution. It is the people of the United States who operate under the structure of government set up by the Constitution, as amended. Constitutional absolutists miss the whole point.
Whose social and moral values? Yours?
The constitution is very clear. Tea Party members like to claim they are defending our founding principles. The first amendment is certainly a primary principle of the United States. As for "why now?", why now for any church or synagogue? Why not?
Feels Like: 95°
Feels Like: 77°
Feels Like: 93°
Share your photos and videos with our online community. Take a look »
View a webcam of the Judge S.S. Jolley Bridge and other places on Marco Island.
Sign up to read an electronic replica of the Marco Eagle newspaper.
Get your local news anywhere you go from the Marco Eagle. Download app »
See photos from local anglers with their biggest catch of the day. Submit your photos.
Our radar shows current conditions and possible severe weather.