Slingblade68 Loc: Charleston SC

Yes, I found it quite amusing how many Chinese Scientists
specializing in "Global Warming" are listed with the worthless United Nations. Talk about Hypocracy. Almost as encouraging as
having Iran "Heading up " the discussion on an Arms negotiation this past week at the UN. Now I am digressing, I apologize for same..

donc711 Loc: North East Kansas

Look straightUp, do you really know the definition of A LIBERAL? I don't think so. A liberal is one who thnks everyones money belongs to the state because the state knows best how to redistribute the wealth. Very much like a socialist. I understand there will always be the poor among us and they will always need help to survive. I just want to help who I know with no deminishing return like taxes and a say in our social structure. I consider myself conservitive and am guarenteed to be secure in my person property and papers. That too much to ask?

straightUp Loc: California

You are INCORRECT!
I'll give you another guess... 'cmon, you can do it.. What is a liberal???


What you described was an extreme version more like a communist.


Well, I don't think helping those you know is too much to ask for and if by "deminishing return" you are somehow referring to taxes then I would say the absence of such is not too much to ask for either - so long as you don't expect anyone to help secure your person, property and papers.

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Who do you believe anyone "expect to help secure your person, property and papers."?

donc711 Loc: North East Kansas

I already did discribe a liberal. And Yes they are very close to being communist in practice. The way ACA was cramed down our throats was a liberal act. As already accepted about Obama care costing more when costs were promised to come down was a liberal act. Oh the concept was nice but even on its face it had to be very costly. Even Harry Ried agrees by asking for more revenue to support it. The leftys even require a new department in the broken IRS to administer the new tax (penalty) making sure everyone comes on board. Except of course the unconstitutional uneven handed way exepmtions are handed out. Liberalism in its worse from has been used to push this monstrousity through. Pelosy even stated while House Speaker, "Let's pass it and read it later. We can fix it then". That's the worse kind of legislature I have ever seen or heard. How many pages was that bill? No one including Pelosy had read it.

That is what a liberal is.

As to who is going to help keep me safe in my papers and person etc. It's a constitutional guarentee, and all lovers of our constution will help in anyway required.

GryWlf49

@straightUp . . . I'm apparently as new as you to this particular forum, so have patience w/ me. My main comment to your most recent entry is simple . . . if you have watched a combination of the MSM {vs} "conservative" and how they present specific events involving Obama {vs} ANY Conservative/Republican, etc., the facts you seek should be as plan as the nose on your face. You express yourself as an intelligent individual; therefore, I feel if you take the time to read different publications and watch different news outlets on the boob tube, you'll see (I would hope) those facts. Take the issue of Bengazi (yes, sounds like "old news" ), but the facts you are asking about are right there! How many rewrites; how many of the "King's men/women" put in front of the American public w/ a lie, only to have their heads eventually handed to them by an awakening news media/body politic (i.e; Ms. Rice). Consider the comments by dear Hillary that, "It's been so long", and, "What does it matter?" Direct lies? Maybe, maybe not. Lies of "omission"? Mor'n likely, as she never answered the question. Keep reading; keep watching . . . and if you can't see it, it would seem to indicate on which side of the chamber you sit (which doesn't matter, as we will all be adversely affected by the misdeeds, half-truths, and outright lies told by this administration).

straightUp Loc: California

Who do I believe anyone...? I'm afraid I don't understand what you are asking.

straightUp Loc: California

No, what you described was your ignorance about liberals.


ACA was discussed openly and put to vote. It was a democratic process and the ACA itself was/is supported by about half the people in this nation. You just happened to be on the loosing side of the vote... "L" ;)


Healthcare is expensive and the costs are rising. You're going to pay more for healthcare with or without the ACA. In fact, if the pre-ACA trends are any guide, your costs will be much higher without ACA. But go ahead and cry... It's what you folks do best.


Oh, a constitutional guarantee eh? Guaranteed by what? Magic? Here's some reality for you... No taxes, no government... no government, no law... no law, no law enforcement... no law enforcement, no guarantee.

straightUp Loc: California

I've been reading news sources from all over the spectrum for over 30 years. But thanks for the advice anyway. The problem is that there is so much misinformation flooding the sources that people aren't getting a clear picture. Misinformation is usually based on some fact taken out of context. This is why so many of the folks here on this site are so convinced. They see the fact but don't understand how it fits into reality.

If this administration is indeed lying to the extent you are suggesting, it should have been easy to present a very clear example. But all I see are long bullet lists of unsubstantial references, lot's of "feelings", vague references to various issues and a lot of frustration. So far, no one has actually presented any proof.

You might say something like "I'm not going to do your homework for you." Well, here's my answer to that... The burden of proof is on the accusation and *I* am not the one making the accusation. See, I'm a busy man, I don't have time to read pages and pages of right-wing conspiracy theories and frustrated opinions. If there is empirical evidence then present it (in your own words) and I will read it here on this site.

Otherwise, you just have to accept that I simply don't buy it.

donc711 Loc: North East Kansas

Well staightUp Take a look at this. If this isn't a liberal DOJ then there just is no such thing in government. This from FOX NEWS considered by most as conservitive but I will concede that they miss the really impolrtant points we need to be watching a lot. But mostly they do a fair job.

The following is copied from a news release fro FOX:
The naming of a journalist as a possible co-conspirator in a criminal case of leaked classified information is "chilling," Judge Andrew Napolitano says.

"The Supreme Court has ruled that when the government makes it difficult for you to do your job as a journalist by scaring off your sources or watching your every move, that’s called 'chilling.'" Napolitano said Monday on Fox News Channel. "Chilling is a constitutional phrase meaning the government hasn't directly silenced me, but it's made it more difficult for me to speak."

Latest: Is Benghazi a Cover Up? Is Obama at the Heart of It? Vote Here

Fox News correspondent James Rosen was named a possible co-conspirator in a Justice Department affidavit, it was learned Monday. His personal emails were searched as part of the investigation.

Napolitano, a former New Jersey Superior Court judge and analyst for Fox News Channel, said it was not a crime for a journalist to ask for, receive, or publish classified information. Nothing in the affadavit claims Rosen did anything more than what journalists are legally allowed to do as part of their jobs, he said.

"James, like all of us who are professionals in this business, have an absolute, constitutionally protected right to seek news of material interest to the public wherever that news may be," Napolitano said.

Though it is a crime for someone to give classified material to a person who does not have clearance to see it, it is not a crime for the person to receive it if that person is a journalist, he said. "It’s just terribly wrong to tell a federal judge that that journalist engaged in criminal activity, when we know from Supreme Court opinions from the Pentagon Papers to the present, James's activity is absolutely protected by the First Amendment."

Napolitano said that when a search warrant is issued, the person who is the target must be told. Rosen and Fox News did not learn of the subpoena of his emails until they read about it Monday in The Washington Post. The request for a search warrant was issued on May 28, 2010.

"The government has an obligation to report this to the target, James, and to anybody else involved – Fox, the computer server, whoever else might be involved – within a reasonable period of time," Napolitano said.

Latest: Is Benghazi a Cover Up? Is Obama at the Heart of It? Vote Here

Depending upon which statute the government used, when the information is in the hands of a third party, such as a computer server, investigators have an obligation to tell the subject of the probe beforehand so it can be challenged, he said. "They didn’t tell anybody."

Now that is liberalism at work and also very distrustive toward our country. We have never lived under such a travesty of justice in our entire history. Only one other president tried this sort of thing and he was forced to resign or be impeached. Recall Nixon? Intrusive and atempted to set up a Nanny State. Don't know how old you are But I recall 1935 Germany and see the very same things happening with this administration as happpened during 1935 Germany. Go figure. That's why I might be considered ultra conservitive prehaps.

GryWlf49

Well said, and I have to agree w/ you. Think the lack of "facts" is the result of the piecemeal information presented and that information being tainted by the presenter. Like you, I'm just gonna keep reading. Think you might believe as I do . . . as long as all this is political, we'll not get a SOLID piece of evidence pointing to one (or a group) person. Right now, am watching the IRS (IMHO the American Gestapo), but it will be some low-level flunkie who takes the hit. Thanks for taking your time to respond; we'll both keep reading and listening!

LAwrence

It's beginning to look like the entire government is totally corrupt. If that is so then we can not expect any truth or justice from them. I hope my conclusion is wrong and that there are still some in government who have the personal integrity to blow the lid off all these lies and deception.

GryWlf49

Probably are those willing to testify . . . they just don't get the chance before they're canned or smeared so their testimony will be questioned. Does seem as though there is little, if any, honesty in D.C..

AuntiE Loc: 45th Least Free State

Executive Order issued on January 22, 2009 stating "Guantanamo Bay will be closed no later then one year from now." Go back and check all major news reports. In fact, he did it as a press piece.

straightUp Loc: California

Fox doesn't miss anything. They are very good at vending information that they know their audience wants to hear and they make a lot of money doing it.


Don't cheat yourself by obscuring the truth with partisan BS... What you are describing is not liberalism at work... it's politics at work. You don't remember Bush and his very conservative government, excluding all journalists from covering the war except for "embedded" journalists?

There isn't anything going on today that wasn't already going on during the Bush administration.



I guess one reason why I might be considered liberal is the same.. ...Because I saw the Bush administration systematically shutting down our open democracy, the same way the fascists did in Europe in the 1930's.

Naomi Wolf wrote a book during the Bush administration called the "End of America" in which she outlines 10 significant steps taken by 20th century fascists and associated each step to something the Bush administration was doing. I'll just sample the first four.

1. invoke a terrifying external enemy: Terrorism was elevated to the "biggest threat to America during the Bush Administration, they even created a color-coded alert system to scare the crap out of people. But the fact of the matter is terrorism does very little damage to American , even though . Fact is actual patterns of )
2. create secret prisons (Guantanamo and a whole network of similar prisons created by the Bush Administration that actually bypasses the Judicial Branch.. (so much for checks and balances in the government).
3, Develop a thug caste or paramilitary force not answerable to citizens. (Blackwater and a whole collection of similar private security companies are not limited by agreements such as the Geneva Convention or by Congressional oversight.
4, Set up an internal surveillance system. (the PATRIOT Act: struck off the books a wide range of laws protecting our civil rights, among them the telecommunications laws regarding the right to privacy and sure enough, it wasn't long before we started to see headlines like "Government Wiretapping of American Citizens" and "Bush Government Spying on Americans."

So, please excuse me for not jumping on the "oh, we just found out we're screwed" party. I've been awake long enough to have seen the power grabs and shadow governments in the previous administrations too.