Big Mistake

This is such a colossal mistake. It will give Al Qaeda an international platform and give them access to rights they don’t deserve. This trial is going to be a circus. You really picked a good one.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29486.html

Advertisements

10 Responses to “Big Mistake”

  1. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    So…what? We just try them in secret…find them guilty…but torture them just a little bit more to squeeze evrything out of them we can before we execute them?

    Tea parties are a circus. Glenn Beck is a circus. Palin is a circus. Let’s show the world how evil these fuckers are. Let’s do it right, in the open, for all to see.

    You know, it’s been eight years. Again, where was the Bush admin during all this? Where is fuckin’ bin Laden? Obama is gonna bring these terrorists to justice finally. But all you do is criticize, condemn, and mock. Why? Do you have anything positive to say, besides he is a good speaker? How about that he seems to be gathering all the intelligence necessary about Afganistan and conferring with military leaders instead of just rushing in? What about that he is greeted and treated with respect around the world? Or that he has the guts to take on some politically risky stuff? By the way, have you noticed that the Supreme Court and the justice system have not fallen apart with Sotomayor on it? And that we didn’t have a complete economic collapse? Or that we haven’t been attacked? Or that taxes have not been raised? Have you noticed that no foreign country thinks we are weak? Or unlawful? Or there has been no inflation that you predicted. Ever notice any of these things? Probably not.

  2. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    I notice all of it. I call each issue as I see it and everything Obama does seems to be exactly in opposition of what I believe in. From gay marriage to deficits.

    The reason we did not have a collapse is because we mortgaged our future to avoid it. The reason inflation hasn’t kicked in is because there is still not enough demand. But just because it has not kicked in, doesn’t mean these actions are still not bad for the country in the long run. Here is a quick list off the top of my head of what I oppose:

    Bailing out the loser banks (rewarding failure)
    Bailing out homeowners (rewarding bad behavior)
    Bailing out the car companies and owning them
    Quadrupling our annual deficit
    Plans to double our national debt
    The Fed buying almost every mortgage (keeps housing prices high)
    The Fed issuing bonds for out debt and then turning around and buying 25% of them (keeps rates low and prolongs bubble)
    Healthcare reform without market oriented, capitalistic principals
    Apologetic international stance
    Staff that all seem to have anti-capitalist backgrounds or views
    Cap and Trade (if it ever passes)
    Card check (if it ever passes)

    Sotomayor was replacing Ruth Bader Ginsberg. I never said the justice system would fall apart.

    We have been attacked but I am not going to put that on Obama

    Like I said, I call each issue as I see them. Just because the country isn’t falling apart doesn’t mean I can’t disagree with the way things are done. I have said countless times on this blog that these policies aren’t going to have major effects on my life (unless we have a series of catastrophic political or economic events.) I will go on as usual.

  3. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    Back to the trial…what are your actual reasons for not wanting it tried in NY? (like the previous WTC bombers were in 1994). Is it security? Is it that you consider this a military/war crime? The publicity? (you know they will be demonized and the whole country will shout them down–which is a good thing). Are you worried about the verdict?

    Obviously the administration wouldn’t do this unless they had a slam dunk. One thing I don’t underdstand though, is that they said they would seek the death penalty–but I thught NY didn’t have it??

    Anyway, I think this is another huge reactionary assault on Obama–as if he secretly wants them to be found not guilty or something. It’s just weird how conservatives react…always wrapping themselves in the flag and religion, and “the American way.” Always anti-foreign, anti-new, anti-thinking outside of the box.

  4. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    First of all the previous WTC bombers were in this country when they committed their crimes. These guys have never set foot in this country and I don’t believe they should have the rights that American citizens should have. I believe that some other form of military or international tribunal would be more appropriate.

    I also think that this gives them a greater platform to voice their insidious and warped vision of the world.

    And I do believe that this will be a circus and could possibly be an international embarassment. I’m all for full disclosure on how we have treated our prisoners but not in this format.

    So tell me what is so out of the box that the liberals have come up with. What is different from any other policy that has not been promoted and implemented around the world in the last 100 years?

    Read Roosevelts 2nd bill of rights. Any of this sound familiar? It’s not new thinking. It’s just the opportunity to implement these ideas.

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

  5. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    I’m not gonna write a progressive vs conservative manifesto. You know the basic tenants of conservatism. Slow to accept change, suspicious of outdsiders and outside views, belief that the past was better than the present, getting “back to basics”, insular thinking, etc. Just the general world view. To me, this all has a lot to do with religion and fear.

  6. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    So you are basically going to ignore my post. Just like you ignore my posts about all of the questionable staff in the White House. Why is it that I own up to everything in the conservative movement that I don’t like and you just basically evade and deflect everything questionable in liberalism?

  7. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    I’ll own up to this: If you want an abortion, pay for it your damn self. How’s that?

    There’s a lot of liberalism I don’t agree with. We’ve been over that. I’m talking more about individual beliefs, rather than government policy. Conservatism is basically “this is what I was taught, this is how it should be, don’t change it because change is scary and as a hetero, white, Christian American things have been pretty good for me.”

    This “2nd Bill of Rights” never got any traction, and it’s not somethng I would support–at all. It’s crazy. Is this what you think Obama is seeking? A right to a job, and education, a home and recreation?

  8. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    No traction?? You need to read this again. Most of these items have government policies that are specifically designed just for these rights. This is not an all or nothing game. Look at massive farm subsidies (Obama), card check (Obama), health care reform (Obama), easy mortgages (Obama) from the government and then subsequent bailouts (Obama) are all based on these principals. These ideas aren’t new, they are just futher steps in the progressive movement and you and Obama clearly are closer to these principals than I am. And it’s not all Obama.
    The Republicans are guilty of many of these as well. Throw them all out. They don’t represent me.

  9. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    You know, I check everything you send me. Don’t be trying to slip a piece of cheese past me. Having said that…

    Farm Subsidies–Obama??

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/04/us/politics/04farm.html

    Easy mortgages–Obama??

    Yeah, as if your industry had nothing to do with THAT!

    Card check??

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/may/14/obama-not-enough-votes-for-labor-bill/

    Anyway, I was referring to Roosevelt’s 2nd Bill of Rights not getting any traction, back in the 40s.

  10. urstupidnourstupid Says:

    While I applaud Obamas hard core fiscal responsibility, you shoud read the entire article. You will find that even Bush’s 200k cap proposal had little effect on subsidies. I’m looking for real reform.

    The government was the catalyst for easy mortgages. They are still doing it today. And here is Barney Franks insane reasoning:

    If many of the loans turn into pumpkins, that’s OK. House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., actually told The New York Times, “I don’t think it’s a bad thing that the bad loans occurred. It was an effort to keep prices from falling too fast.” In other words, soaring defaults are not a bug. They’re a feature.

    And just because Obama can’t get it past, doesn’t mean I shoudn’t refrain from criticizing his support for it. Right?

    All of your responses are deflections and avoid the issues completely. Why don’t you defend corn subsidies? Why don’t you support Frank and tell my why it’s good for America to issue government backed loans that are going to go bad? Defend card check! Why are you skirting all of these issues?

    “We can evade reality, but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: