The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

[burd]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I'm going to give you credit for spending only half your time in fantasyland in this post Opie! I've often been on Obama's case for not sending you to that gulag you so richly deserve to reside in, but I must complement you on the self realization that you're a weird, unpleasant, smelly old geezer. So, kudos to you...I guess...

I have to say I will regret the day they move Pio over to the dementia unit. He writes well, has an extensive, though dated, fund of knowledge, is an inventive name-caller, and disagrees with just about everything I've ever thought or written.

So I cherish these last days.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I do not think this is true. I don't have a scorecard, but I think there are a bunch of liberals here who take Congressional approval of acts of war seriously and want to see the Executive hamstrung unless it is a case of defense against immediate, specific danger. One of Obama's many failing in my eyes is he campaigned on the understanding that Unitary Executive Theory is unconstitutional and hugely dangerous and should be tossed onto the ash heap of history. No doubt he would argue that in the absence of a functioning Congress he has no choice. I disagree. I think by continuing the trend of usurping legislative prerogatives he has emboldened the cynics in the GOP caucus, since they can both have their cake (not take potentially embarrassing actions) and eat it too (blame him if it goes wrong; say he should have acted sooner if it goes right; sue him for the usurpation of power in either case). For that matter, he's also let a lot of Dem Members off the hook who don't want to risk making their own version of Hillary's Iraq vote.

The presidency is far, far too strong as has been so since WW2. Every subsequent president, of both parties, has made it worse. The incumbent party is always tempted to use this power "for good," particularly when the other party controls Congress, but that's not the way our government is supposed to work. Even if it is too much to ask for a president to "unilaterally disarm" in the face of a opposing Congress, I hope that someday the fever breaks and, perhaps during a period of hat trick rule, the branches come back into alignment.

I was referring only to our colleagues who post here.

[Old Pio]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Why is it the people who scream the most about free speech know the least about the first amendment or what it actually means?

They may not be cheap ambulance chasers, graduates of third tier law schools, evicting old ladies and getting drug dealers and kiddie diddlers off, but they have some understanding of the concept of free speech. A concept which many liberals, including some who post here, think should be "flexible." As in: I and the people who agree with me have free speech rights. They and the ones who disagree with me probably don't.

[FreshFish]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

starting at about the 1 minute mark of this video:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/380462846...=3804628469001

is a clever piece that is both sobering and a bit ironic. the whole clip is 10 minutes long.

[FreshFish]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I also would like to see a Congressional vote to approve this war on ISIS and other terrrorist groups. Not only for Constitutional reasons, but also as an expression of national will. If we want to rally allies to participate in this fight, let's show them we are serious.

and for budgetary reasons, how about a serious conversation about how it will be funded?



It's been said that partisan politics (of the party vs party variety I mean, not the isolationists in each party vs the realists in each party) ends at the nation's borders. Time to see that again.

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

and for budgetary reasons, how about a serious conversation about how it will be funded?

Just like how we fund everything else - our Bank of China World DoublePlusGood Rewards Mastercard.

[unofan]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/09/j...se-patriotism/

Jon Stewart skewers Fox News, especially Karl Rove and Eric Bolling, over their "fake patriotism."

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Meh. Soft targets.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Meh. Soft targets.

True, though 29% of the country listens to the Fox 24/7 attack ad and thinks it's "news."

Granted -- not one of those people is ever going to see TDS, and even if they did it would be way over their heads.

[SteveP]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

True, though 29% of the country listens to the Fox 24/7 attack ad and thinks it's "news."

Granted -- not one of those people is ever going to see TDS, and even if they did it would be way over their heads.

You'd be surprised how many of us "old" FNC-luvin' conservatives also watch TDS on a regular basis -- and get it. Most nights I laugh my arse off at Stewart. His writers are good at skewering both sides. Other nights I want to reach through the TV and strangle the SOB.

I suppose that's how "the ladies of the chorale" (to borrow a phrase ) feel most nights about the likes of Hannity & O'Reilly.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

You'd be surprised how many of us "old" FNC-luvin' conservatives also watch TDS on a regular basis -- and get it.

I doubt you have illusions about FNC's orientation. I sometimes listen to the Pacifica Network, but I'm under no illusions that I'm getting anything other than an informercial for one side.

[SteveP]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I doubt you have illusions about FNC's orientation. I sometimes listen to the Pacifica Network, but I'm under no illusions that I'm getting anything other than an informercial for one side.

Sure, FNC leans to the right, but you have to admit that there are more left-leaning commentators (Carville, Bechel, Combes, Powers and Greta come immediately to mind) than on MSNBC, which has simply fallen off the left side of the cliff and has zero credibility as "news" network.

[Gurtholfin]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Sure, FNC leans to the right, but you have to admit that there are more left-leaning commentators (Carville, Bechel, Combes, Powers and Greta come immediately to mind) than on MSNBC, which has simply fallen off the left side of the cliff and has zero credibility as "news" network.

Seriously?

LOL

[Gurtholfin]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Difference between Stewart & Colbert and O'Reilly & Hannity is that two of them are on Comedy Central while the other two are on a "News" channel.

An apt comparison is Faux and MSNBC. They are yin and yang.

And you have to be kidding if you think Faux isn't as far to the right as MSNBC is to the left.

[FreshFish]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

True, though 89% of the liberal elite in this country reads the NYTimes 24/7 attack columns and thinks it's "news."