Do you think Colonel Peters is correct?

What has Obama done while he's been in office that have negatively affected YOU? Do YOU have less freedom of religion? Do YOU have less freedom of speech?
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Forcing nuns to pay for contraceptives and aborti-facient drugs in direct violation of their religious beliefs diminishes everyone's freedom of religion.

Seizing the phone records of the Associated Press and monitoring James Rosen's phone calls/emails while calling him a "co-conspirator" in a leak investigation diminishes everyone's freedom of speech.

And those are just 2 examples. There are many others.

Forcing nuns to pay for contraceptives and aborti-facient drugs in direct violation of their religious beliefs diminishes everyone's freedom of religion.

Seizing the phone records of the Associated Press and monitoring James Rosen's phone calls/emails while calling him a "co-conspirator" in a leak investigation diminishes everyone's freedom of speech.

And those are just 2 examples. There are many others. Originally Posted by lustylad

Speak for yourself dick licker. My freedom of speech to make fun of religion is intact. For now. Not sure how long that will last if we get a Bible thumper in there!

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX
What has Obama done while he's been in office that have negatively affected YOU? Do YOU have less freedom of religion? Do YOU have less freedom of speech?

Well your boy Obammy has spied on everybody and yes I do mean everybody. From all of our allies to everyday the mom and pops' email and phone conversation/text. He is behind the IRS targeting campaign, (face it,no one is that stupid, he knew) He knows all about targeting James Rosen and trying to censure his free speech through fear tactics. What about US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three others ? Do you think Obama may have known a little about the purposeful violation of these mens civil liberties ? Do you not think that their free speech is forever crushed ?

Forcing nuns to pay for contraceptives and aborti-facient drugs in direct violation of their religious beliefs diminishes everyone's freedom of religion.

s. Originally Posted by lustylad

So making folks pay for wars who think that is aganist their religion is what? Ok?

http://www.shallnot.org/





If speedy wrote the 2nd amendment

I honestly don't understand the mindset of America's Liberals. These people (Al Qaeda, ISIS, their all the same, they HATE us, even when we give to them, remember Boston bombers) are going to kill us anyway that they can, they have no respect for us, they know that we are just worried about "being nice". That ubiquitous political correct nonsense, is the driving force of becoming a country of wimps. Let me sound a bit like drunken sailor "F-CK THAT SH-T, being nice does not bring respect. Why didn't Japan attack back against us, because they respected us, we neutralized them, (with fewer American casualties) and the world needs to do the same with these radicals, will there be "collateral damage", of course, but how many Westerners are becoming that "collateral damage", and it appears that no one in our government has the gonads or the will to put an end it, or at the very least, start planning a strategy. This country is getting pathetic, nothing but a bunch reactive Liberals, we need to start being proactive, and our government needs to start acting like it cares more about "the people" than about their "political persuasions" and their benefits, their allowing anyone to come into this country for "the vote", etc., because while our government is doing nothing, our enemy is preparing for our providence.

So making folks pay for wars who think that is aganist their religion is what? Ok? Originally Posted by WTF

Only for the wars IB thinks are cool!

I honestly don't understand the mindset of America's Liberals. These people (Al Qaeda, ISIS, their all the same, they HATE us, even when we give to them, remember Boston bombers) are going to kill us anyway that they can, they have no respect for us, they know that we are just worried about "being nice". That ubiquitous political correct nonsense, is the driving force of becoming a country of wimps. Let me sound a bit like drunken sailor "F-CK THAT SH-T, being nice does not bring respect. Why didn't Japan attack back against us, because they respected us, we neutralized them, (with fewer American casualties) and the world needs to do the same with these radicals, will there be "collateral damage", of course, but how many Westerners are becoming that "collateral damage", and it appears that no one in our government has the gonads or the will to put an end it, or at the very least, start planning a strategy. This country is getting pathetic, nothing but a bunch reactive Liberals, we need to start being proactive, and our government needs to start acting like it cares more about "the people" than about their "political persuasions" and their benefits, their allowing anyone to come into this country for "the vote", etc., because while our government is doing nothing, our enemy is preparing for our providence. Originally Posted by Cherie

If you do not comprehend the difference between fighting a country and fighting a collection of individuals that meld into the population of a country--often without the approval of the country--then is is very difficult to explain anything further about this. If you find a terrorist camp in Somalia, by all means strike it. But if you know that somewhere in Houston there are 20 terrorists, how much of the city do you take out to "save" it? How much real estate do you take out in Paris to retaliate against the terrorists there?

If you believe the right/wrong of bombing Nagasaki and Dresden is unambiguous, then you will never see the issue. If you realize that they are very gray, not white or black, then I don't see how you can say what you said.

Only for the wars IB thinks are cool! Originally Posted by Old-T

Some of us take pride in being "judged by our haters"... Old-Treasonist

Some of us take pride in being "judged by our haters"... Old-Treasonist Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

I don't hate you. But I do admit I scoff at most your posts.

But if you know that somewhere in Houston there are 20 terrorists, how much of the city do you take out to "save" it? How much real estate do you take out in Paris to retaliate against the terrorists there? Originally Posted by Old-T

For some reason you have accepted the belief that the War on Terrorists can be fought like a nintendo game without people being deployed to root out the nests.

How much of Paris did the French destroy to kill off those who attacked?

We know who have the balls NOW in the War on Terrorists, and who doesn't:

Obama fled from Iraq without safeguarding the costly victory. Now we have ISIS and we are less safe. That Obama decision is affecting us all.

Obama is about to flee Afghanistan and now ISIS has been seen in that country and that makes us less safe. That Obama decision is affecting us all.

Obamacare has driven up my healthcare preminums through my work. That Obama decision is affecting me.

Obama's IRS won't give tax exempt status to organizations that I support so it's costing me money to support them. That Obama decision is costing me money.

For some reason you have accepted the belief that the War on Terrorists can be fought like a nintendo game without people being deployed to root out the nests.

How much of Paris did the French destroy to kill off those who attacked?

We know who have the balls NOW in the War on Terrorists, and who doesn't:

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Unfortunately "the war on terrorists" will not be fought by this President, as he has an agenda and has been very forthright from the beginning, we the American people just did not want to see/believe it, or maybe those who voted for him didn't even know.

In his book "The Audacity of Hope" he stated "I will stand with the Muslims should the Political winds shift in an ugly direction." Well that is certainly coming to fruition, as we loose Americans/Westerners by any way they/the terrorists can do it and all Washington thinks about is being Politically Correct, well PC is/will be the ruination of this country.

If you do not comprehend the difference between fighting a country and fighting a collection of individuals that meld into the population of a country--often without the approval of the country--then is is very difficult to explain anything further about this. If you find a terrorist camp in Somalia, by all means strike it. But if you know that somewhere in Houston there are 20 terrorists, how much of the city do you take out to "save" it? How much real estate do you take out in Paris to retaliate against the terrorists there?

If you believe the right/wrong of bombing Nagasaki and Dresden is unambiguous, then you will never see the issue. If you realize that they are very gray, not white or black, then I don't see how you can say what you said. Originally Posted by Old-T

I have to say that your Houston argument is pretty poor and I haven't seen anyone advocate that either so why try to justify it? I think the difference that you don't want to admit is that in the little village in Somalia we can go in and start getting intelligence by having some prisoners. Obama has ordered the killing of lots of leaders but the thing about an organization is that someone moves up to take their place. There also seems to be no shortage of new volunteers on the lower tiers. Intelligence that comes from prisoners is invaluable and under Obama orders we have thrown away a lot of opportunities. If you decide that there is not good intelligence then destroy the village...completely. A drone strike is just a start. You need to allow no survivors and not outside contact. Allow the terrorists to drive into the village and find everyone dead. Let them wonder about how much we know about their operations. Remove a couple of bodies and let them wonder if their comrades (that are missing) are spilling their guts. Use some imagination damn it. How does a football team fare if they use the same three plays over and over again? They lose eventually.

Unfortunately "the war on terrorists" will not be fought by this President, as he has an agenda and has been very forthright from the beginning, we the American people just did not want to see/believe it, or maybe those who voted for him didn't even know. Originally Posted by Cherie

That's not the only "can" he has kicked down the road in order to "augment" what he perceives to be his "legacy" as he feebly attempts to rewrite his history. There is a "little matter" of added $9 trillion in added debt with the additional burden of government subsidized mandatory health care... just to name another.

I suspect that his actual "legacy" will be to demonstrate to the U.S. voters that electing a President is not a popularity contest based on cultural correctness and "firsts" for the country.

Recently I've been wondering how the Liberal-AntiWar crowd exterminate their homes ... or rid their yards of fire ants .... electronic zappers? Watching them get rid of wasps would be a hoot! "Certainly don't want to kill them" ... right?