Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

HE's shipping money away from things like the useless f22 and back to personnel, so they don't have to use scrap metal for armor, or stay in rat infested hospitals.
I dont' even know why Obama even tries, He could spend 100% more and they's say he was cutting back, in a full panic they clicked into auto pilot mode.

To tell the truth, both candidates would've spent more. One would've just spent less more than the other.

I personally went with McCain because he was in a war similar to the one america is in now. A uniformed force has a strong disadvantage against a guerilla force, just ask the british during the Revolutionary war.

Also, Obama wants a civilian force that is just as well funded and well trained as the military. I really don't like that idea.

Did anyone know that an american citizen cannot sue the government unless the government allows the citizen to sue?

halonachos wrote:
Did anyone know that an american citizen cannot sue the government unless the government allows the citizen to sue?

Doctrine of sovereign immunity: you cannot sue the crown. It's been an aspect of common law for longer than there has been a common law, and since our courts kept applying common law after we split from Britain, there simply never was a change. There are statutory exceptions for Contracts (since the 1880s) and torts (since the 1940s), and of course you could always sue the government over civil rights issues. Considering that today there is a special court just for claims against the Federal Government, things have loosened up a bit.

halonachos wrote:
Also, Obama wants a civilian force that is just as well funded and well trained as the military. I really don't like that idea.

Yeah, because arming the citizens is a bad idea that will never catch on...

No, but making a civilian army is bad. Look at hitler and his brownshirts, same concept.

How exactly is it different from any other Militia force that has existed?

Not making a point, just genuinely curious.

Not really. They were really of use in getting HItler to power and therefore getting him control of the actual professional army.

Still, 4 pages early well played.

I personally went with McCain because he was in a war similar to the one america is in now

Cheap "how that ended" jibes aside I really don't get this as being relvant at all. Whilst the President is CiC it's not like he actually leads the troops into battle or formulates attacks plans. having fought in a war X years ago really bears no meaning or relation to the current state of affairs.

Did anyone happen to catch the Daily Show with Jon Stewart from last night (April 16, 2009)? They sent 'senior reported' John Sullivan (may have the name wrong) - aka the British guy on the show, who has an obviously British accent, to a Tea Party (or maybe more than one) to interview Americans. He was asking people, "Who is more tyrannical, the British Crown before the Revolution, or President Obama?" All these people keep saying it's Obama. He starts arguing with them about how the British were more tyrannical. The British killed 30 million Indians, and yet people complain about a 3% tax raise? Someone said how Obama is 'taxation without representation', to which the Daily Show guy responded, 'but, you really have a representative now. with the British, you really didn't. The British just taxed however they wanted.' Someone was comparing how the tax code is the American government's version of thumbscrews. 'But, the British litterally took your thumb and literally put a screw to it.'

Anyway, I found it highly amusing and didn't do it justice. Comparing Obama to the British Crown, and deciding that Obama is actually worse - laughable.

The right-wing is proving they're nothing but hypocrites. Everything they hated the left-wing for doing towards Bush, they're doing towards Obama - but in a span of 3 months. And it's not like the 2008 taxes have anything to do with him (and that's what we're paying, 2008 taxes!).

Maybe one of our younger members can go find a clip of the Daily Show on U-Tube or U-Haul or iCarly and post a link to it via Al Gore's invention.

Obama wants the civilian force to be under control of the executive branch, militias are temporary but he wants a permanant force that only he can control. Similar to the brownshirts, whether or not they will carry out the same actions I do not know.

Bush's tax policies shouldn't be in effect till midterm of Obama's first year in office, tax policies are slow to take effect. All of the issues we face now could be the effects of Clinton's policies.

Wait? Are armed Civies good or bad? Is Obama going to arm people or take away thier guns? Is it only ok if the armed civies hate and fear Obama? IF they arm aginst him good, arm for him bad? Tell any Militia they are temporary and see what happens. I find it funny that people complain about him taking guns away, then complain he is going to arm people.

Saying that the taxes we pay to day may be Clintons fault is silly, One of Bush's first jobs were the Bush tax cuts and frittering away our surplus.

dietrich wrote:Did anyone happen to catch the Daily Show with Jon Stewart from last night (April 16, 2009)? They sent 'senior reported' John Sullivan (may have the name wrong) - aka the British guy on the show, who has an obviously British accent, to a Tea Party (or maybe more than one) to interview Americans. He was asking people, "Who is more tyrannical, the British Crown before the Revolution, or President Obama?" All these people keep saying it's Obama. He starts arguing with them about how the British were more tyrannical. The British killed 30 million Indians, and yet people complain about a 3% tax raise? Someone said how Obama is 'taxation without representation', to which the Daily Show guy responded, 'but, you really have a representative now. with the British, you really didn't. The British just taxed however they wanted.' Someone was comparing how the tax code is the American government's version of thumbscrews. 'But, the British litterally took your thumb and literally put a screw to it.'

Anyway, I found it highly amusing and didn't do it justice. Comparing Obama to the British Crown, and deciding that Obama is actually worse - laughable.

The right-wing is proving they're nothing but hypocrites. Everything they hated the left-wing for doing towards Bush, they're doing towards Obama - but in a span of 3 months. And it's not like the 2008 taxes have anything to do with him (and that's what we're paying, 2008 taxes!).

Maybe one of our younger members can go find a clip of the Daily Show on U-Tube or U-Haul or iCarly and post a link to it via Al Gore's invention.

Quoting the Daily Show will get you nowhere. Comedy show first, left-leaning at best. It's pretty easy to visit any political rally (on either side that is) and find some idiots.

I think people have really misunderstood the concept of the tea parties. Ideally the tea parties purpose was to give a voice to those who feel that we are spending trillions of dollars on projects and ideas that in the end will limit our freedoms. We're are stuck with this debt and we feel helpless in what the government will do in our name. This isn't some rant coming from a conservative (though I am). If McCain was elected and worked towards passing all of the spending that this administration has, then yes I believe that the Tea parties would still have happened. When Washington screws up (regardless of who is directing the ship) we feel the pinch. The idea is that the average Joe feels wronged and to have Stewart, Janine Garofulo (sp), Maddow, Anderson, and other popular media personalities bash us for wanting to affect change, makes me sick.

Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and other conservative commentators make fun of the liberal protests all of the time. I know this, I'm not stupid. To me it just seems wrong when somebody wants to call a series of rallies that have the intent of address the issue of where our tax dollars are going Racist is absurd.

To reiterate a point from someone else, we as a country bow to no man.

sexiest_hero wrote:Wait? Are armed Civies good or bad? Is Obama going to arm people or take away thier guns? Is it only ok if the armed civies hate and fear Obama? IF they arm aginst him good, arm for him bad? Tell any Militia they are temporary and see what happens. I find it funny that people complain about him taking guns away, then complain he is going to arm people.

Saying that the taxes we pay to day may be Clintons fault is silly, One of Bush's first jobs were the Bush tax cuts and frittering away our surplus.

Making another military commanded exclusively by the president is ALWAYS a bad thing. Having civilians with weapons is better because they can choose what to do with their weapons. They can support the government or go against a tyranny, another army ruled by the president supports only the president while the military supports the american way of life. There's a clear cut here.

I'm not saying that the taxes we pay now are from the clinton era, but I am saying that the deficit could only be the after effects of clinton's time in office. The economy is like the ocean and temperature. Its cold during the summer and warmer during the winter.

sexiest_hero wrote:Wait? Are armed Civies good or bad? Is Obama going to arm people or take away thier guns? Is it only ok if the armed civies hate and fear Obama? IF they arm aginst him good, arm for him bad? Tell any Militia they are temporary and see what happens. I find it funny that people complain about him taking guns away, then complain he is going to arm people.

Saying that the taxes we pay to day may be Clintons fault is silly, One of Bush's first jobs were the Bush tax cuts and frittering away our surplus.

Armed civilians are good when the government aren't backing them. When Obama said that he wanted a civilain military force that was as strong as our own military that sent a shiver down my spine. We have the second amendment for a reason. We must be able to protect ourselves from the government if it becomes too powerful. What hope does a civilain with access only to pistols and firearms geared towards hunting have against a full-fledged military machine.

A Surplus is not always a good thing. When we have a surplus, what does the government do? They find new and exciting ways to waste it. Our economy is a big ship. It can't turn on a dime. Time and a variety of factors lead to success. We can't always narrow down what causes the ups and downs. Don't be too resistent to believing that a tiny wave 12+ years ago can't come back to haunt us with a tidal wave. We just need to make smart choices now.

Edit: I swear I was writing the same time as halonachos.

I still think that Shays' Rebellion would have been a better event to model and closer to what they are doing.

Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity, and other conservative commentators make fun of the liberal protests all of the time. I know this, I'm not stupid. To me it just seems wrong when somebody wants to call a series of rallies that have the intent of address the issue of where our tax dollars are going Racist is absurd.

Except thats really not what those rallies are about. They're an empty soapbox for bunk conservative demagoguery and convey a questionable and almost unlawful message to the American people.

Fox news is the last place that should be running rallies for the people. The medias job is to report, not make stories, and I'm sure they loved every minute of doing their fething job wrong. Not that they ever do it right.

Fair and balanced news my fething ass. They are not a legitimate news agency.

Really? The rallies are not meant to provoke some sort of anti-tax payment movement. If you think that these were conceived with the false notion of not paying taxes then you're just not getting it.

Fox News promoted and covered the events. That is a far cry from running them. I would like to see a compilation from other networks regarding their coverage.

Do you get your news from MSNBC? Fox uses that slogan because they do cover both sides. I have no problem saying that Fox news leans right, but its laughable to say that Fox is not a legitemate news source. I don't hear anybody from Fox saying that Obama should resign or is telling the President to shut up (see Keith Obermann). Give me a break.

Who is really dumb enough to say that you shouldn't pay your taxes. Anybody with a spec of intelligence knows that our tax dollars go towards things we need like infrastructure, defense, and education. If anybody feels that you shouldn't pay taxes then they may as well go live in some third-world country.

The point of this thing was to inform others that they are not getting what they want from this administration. If you aren't happy you, you vocalize your beliefs. What is wrong with this idea?

Really? The rallies are not meant to provoke some sort of anti-tax payment movement. If you think that these were conceived with the false notion of not paying taxes then you're just not getting it.

I'm only going to "get it" as well as the news network conveys it. If that wasn't their message (albeit clearly it was just a rallying point and not the point of the rallies themselves) then they did their jobs damn poorly.

Fox News promoted and covered the events. That is a far cry from running them. I would like to see a compilation from other networks regarding their coverage.

Fox news promoted, covered, hosted, and funded the events. They were in every part of it, they may not have been alone but they had their fingers in far more of it then they should have. And by that I mean they should have had nothing to do with it beyond coverage. They made the story they covered, they went beyond yellow journalism here. Far beyond.

Then the following correspondence from the other networks was just as shameful. They covered it in such a way that skewed it for the % of the population that knew nothing of the events. CNN went above and beyond their duties to make the people who attended appear to be a bunch of hate-mongers.

Fox news is the last place that should be running rallies for the people. The medias job is to report, not make stories, and I'm sure they loved every minute of doing their fething job wrong. Not that they ever do it right.

Let's go back in time and see the absolutely dreadful coverage provided by MSNBC during the RNC convention. I believe that after that Chris Matthews was pulled from certain events for his obvious bias. Remember his "shiver". Ya other media outlets have no sort of bias.

Let's go back in time and see the absolutely dreadful coverage provided by MSNBC during the RNC convention. I believe that after that Chris Matthews was pulled from certain events for his obvious bias. Remember his "shiver". Ya other media outlets have no sort of bias.

I'm not talking about the other ones. I'm talking about this one. Being bad in a crowded field of bad doesn't make you good.

halonachos wrote:Obama wants the civilian force to be under control of the executive branch, militias are temporary but he wants a permanant force that only he can control.

Really ? That only HE can control ? Hyperbole much. Presumably this "militia", and we'll just ignore the whole national guard issue as it's not like they've ever been used against the American people at demonstrations right ?-- will consist of who exactly ? All the "rabid" "anti gun" "tree hugging" "pc" liberals who so terrify .. er.... who again ?

Similar to the brownshirts, whether or not they will carry out the same actions I do not know.

Let's think about this : will Obama suddenly form a fascist government based upon the superiority of the Ayran race and then try to conquer Europe ? You're not even making arguments now, you're vomiting out BS from rightwing shockjocks.

I really wish you rightwing guys had been so proactive during the last 8 years or so.

Bush's tax policies shouldn't be in effect till midterm of Obama's first year in office, tax policies are slow to take effect. All of the issues we face now could be the effects of Clinton's policies.

Errmm... I'm not claiming to be an expert or even having much of interest in your hideously contrived tax system, but.. it's unlikely that you can pin this one on Clinton.

The economy is like the ocean and temperature

fethed up by global warming and environmental mismanagement ? Sure is lucky you've had such a pro environment govt for.. oh.. wait...

Who shall we blame that one on ? I nominate FDR, he's had it easy for far too long.

Quoting the Daily Show will get you nowhere. Comedy show first, left-leaning at best

At "best" ? Substitute left for right and you've equally described the Fox "news" channel, which it is alright to quote from ? It is funnier at times I guess.

Who is really dumb enough to say that you shouldn't pay your taxes

see earlier in the thread.

We just when through this a few days ago, and people felt that Civies should have enough power to overthrow the government if need be. Next y His words out of contex. This force would resemble air national guard and coast guard, and follow everything outlined in the military code of conduct, like the other guards do.

The tea party was Overseen by Fox News. It said "FOX News's Tea Parties" in big white letters. At the top of the screen. I sat there and watched it. It's easy to rail against taxes,and easy to tie them to Obama even though they are 2008 taxes. It's easy to blast the Money given to the states, because the cops, teachers and firefighters, jobs they saved are faceless. Some governors postured for show, but they knew the money was needed and caved.




Pause it at 1:37.

Just say no to biased media and yes to fair play freedom of speech

Unless you're speaking from an anti war or left of O'reilly perspective seemingly.

Yeah, um it said nothing about FOX sponsoring it, just covering it while the other news organisations swept it under the urg and tried to ignore it. Most of today's meida IS liberal, radio is mainly conservative and liberal shows die out on the radio. FOX is the only conservative news network. Pretending that the news is unbiased is rather childish.

reds8n wrote:Errmm... I'm not claiming to be an expert or even having much of interest in your hideously contrived tax system, but.. it's unlikely that you can pin this one on Clinton.

Actually, along with help from Al Sharpton and other black leaders, Clinton effectively stated that not giving loans to minorities is rascist. So in order to save face, banks gave loans to minorities just because and gave loans to others who were high-risk lenders just because. Those high-risk lenders took the loans and began living way above their means. They couldn't afford their houses and other items soon and that brought about the credit crunch we now see.

reds8n wrote:

Just say no to biased media and yes to fair play freedom of speech

Unless you're speaking from an anti war or left of O'reilly perspective seemingly.

Just say no to biased media means just say no to fox news. You know what the only major difference is between them and the daily show/colbert report? Ones a comedy network thats not meant to be taken seriously and the other is just full of idiots.

So how about that secret muslim president that just gave us to Saudi Arabia? Isn't he horrible for raising our taxes by not changing last years tax plan! Thanks fox news.

Actually, along with help from Al Sharpton and other black leaders, Clinton effectively stated that not giving loans to minorities is rascist. So in order to save face, banks gave loans to minorities just because and gave loans to others who were high-risk lenders just because. Those high-risk lenders took the loans and began living way above their means. They couldn't afford their houses and other items soon and that brought about the credit crunch we now see.

You heard it here first. Black people caused the housing crisis.

Yeah, um it said nothing about FOX sponsoring it, just covering it while the other news organisations swept it under the urg and tried to ignore it. Most of today's meida IS liberal, radio is mainly conservative and liberal shows die out on the radio. FOX is the only conservative news network. Pretending that the news is unbiased is rather childish.

There is no emoticon for the emotion "Oh god your blind and deaf". Sponsorship is not free. Paying hosts is not free. Providing venues is not free. Organizing events is not free. Advertising for events is not free. Fox news sponsored these events. They payed for these events. Of course the other networks are going to mock them. They went out of their way to prop up and advertise a series of protests based on 2008 tax legislation and it all turned into a giant anti obama anti socialist butthurt rant by the idiots of this country. Fox news went out of their way to make drama, they are the news equivalent of a myspace dramawhore. They are fething teenagers with cameras.

Oh god, shuma. First of all, it was clinton and his whole "give money to people who won't pay it back" agenda. Minorities are still underpaid and still mostly high-risk lenders.

If FOX news is sponsoring these events then why shouldn't they? Why not if everyone else is going to ignore them? Are you that much of an Obamazombie? You think that the right is so evil and that fox is so evil that they should be burned at the stake do you?

If FOX news is sponsoring these events then why shouldn't they? Why not if everyone else is going to ignore them? Are you that much of an Obamazombie? You think that the right is so evil and that fox is so evil that they should be burned at the stake do you?

I shouldn't have to explain the role of the media too you. Shouldn't you be in school or something? It's a weekday.

The media hasn't followed its role in over a hundred years. When McCain went oversees, only 1 station covered it. When Obama went overseas, 30 stations were covering it. Its a cult of personality my friend and you are part of it.

halonachos wrote:The media hasn't followed its role in over a hundred years. When McCain went oversees, only 1 station covered it. When Obama went overseas, 30 stations were covering it. Its a cult of personality my friend and you are part of it.

Seriously though, you probably have a geography test tomorrow or something, and you're young republicans league meeting is likely after that. You don't want to miss it! Education is important!

A republican, god no. I'm liberal with my social standings. So why did you vote for Obama shuma? Was it his abs, stunning physique, nice smile, or his smooth talking that made you fall in love with him.

Oh and you're joke failed seeing as though tomorrow is saturday and I dno't know many american schools that are open on saturdays. JOKE FAIL.

halonachos wrote:A republican, god no. I'm liberal with my social standings. So why did you vote for Obama shuma? Was it his abs, stunning physique, nice smile, or his smooth talking that made you fall in love with him.

If you don't get back to your schoolwork I'm calling your parents.