home

President Obama Speaks to Nation on ISIS

Update: Best line of Obama's speech: "Freedom is More Powerful Than Fear."

Shorter version: No boots on the ground (with a moving definition of what constitutes boots -- boots now seems limited to hand to hand combat, not troops on ground.) "What we should not do" is allow ourselves to "be drawn into long and costly ground war in Syria and Iraq."

We can expect more kill missions (whatever happened to the capture part? It seems gone.) Asks Congress to pass authorization for use of force against ISIS. Just a few references to assault rifles. Asks Congress to pass a bill preventing those on the no-fly list from buying them. We can't stop every mass killer but we can make it harder for them to kill.

Second Update: The rest of what he said:

We will fight ISIS with air strikes, special forces on the ground and working with our partners. We are working with Turkey to seal its border.

Other things we are doing: Stronger screening for those who come without a visa, re-examining our visa process.

We cannot turn against each other, this is not a war between Americans and Islam. ISIS is a tiny fraction of more than 1 billion Muslims.

We must enlist Muslim communities as our allies. Muslims must confront and reject hateful ideology and speak out against those interpretations of Islam.

All Americans must reject religious tests and proposals that Muslim Americans should be treated differently. When we travel down that road we lose.

Muslim Americans are our friends, neighbors, our men and women in uniform, our sport heros.

Our country is founded on our belief in human dignity and that everyone is equal in the eyes of G-d and the law. Freedom is more powerful than fear.

Original Post

President Obama is about to speak to the nation about ISIS and San Bernadino.

Will he announce any policy changes? How many times will he mention the need for gun control?

Stay tuned. Here's a place to discuss his speech.

< Over-Reacting to ISIS Threat | San Bernadino: No Links to Non-U.S. Terror Groups >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    This was the scary part: (5.00 / 4) (#4)
    by NYShooter on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 08:13:04 PM EST
    "We must enlist Muslim communities as our allies"

    I don't even understand the concept. Shouldn't this be their their war with which  we're willing to help?

    From what I've seen the Mid-eastern countries hate each other more than they hate ISIS. As a matter of fact, many are financing ISIS, and, our great NATO ally, Turkey, has been the open gate for ISIS fighters to waltz into Syria, plus, they're the primary customers for ISIS oil.

    And, suppose by some miracle, ISIS is killed, or, thrown completely out of Syria and Iraq, who do you trust to take over governance of those two countries? You saw how quickly the Iraqis folded when we pulled out.

    Talk about a no-win situation!

    I think (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 08:15:31 PM EST
    he's talking about the Muslims here in America. Having the Muslim communities help weed out the bad eggs in their midst.

    Parent
    The Muslim community in California (none / 0) (#25)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:16:43 AM EST
    Had no idea

    Parent
    YEah (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:38:57 AM EST
    I know. He had quit going to the mosque and all kinds of stuff. There were a few clues though. I read where someone saw people moving a lot of stuff in an out. Though honestly people move crap in and out of houses and apartments all the time. I would hate for someone to call the police on me for moving crap in and out of my house.

    Parent
    The grandmother was (2.00 / 1) (#50)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:27:24 AM EST
    living there.

    Thinking that she didn't know what was happening is a total denial of reality.

    Parent

    Am I the only one that finds humor (5.00 / 2) (#153)
    by CoralGables on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:53:58 PM EST
    in the above claim that someone else has a total denial of reality.

    Parent
    Oh, c'mon (none / 0) (#27)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:02:18 AM EST
    everybody knew the Berdoo shooters were going to attack. Just ask Donald Trump.

    /snark attack.

    Parent

    Heh, and I would hate for someone (none / 0) (#28)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:04:15 AM EST
    To call the police on me for missing church. At this point I'm such an enormous offender I oughtta be doing life :)

    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#40)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:04:10 AM EST
    The reports I saw said this man was deeply religious.  Praying several times a day.  I think I even read he memorized the Koran front to back (or back to front).
    That that person should stop going to church is not the same as you missing a Sunday because you are binging.

    IMO

    Parent

    He could be attending a different (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:35:45 AM EST
    Mosque. He could have been devoting his "religious time" to a certain area of study. He could also have been having one of those moments where you question your beliefs.

    These are all things I grew up understanding were my rights and maybe even part of my charter as an American.

    Parent

    Those countries seem perfectly willing (none / 0) (#7)
    by jondee on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 08:18:26 PM EST
    to use murderous thugs i.e., Muslim fanatics, against each other.

    Parent
    he looked & sounded like nixon (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by The Addams Family on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:29:57 AM EST


    Say what? (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:55:08 AM EST
    Okay, that's it. Please stop bogarting the bong, and pass it along to the next person. You've obviously had more than enough.

    Parent
    Nixon inherited a war also, but (5.00 / 2) (#22)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 02:40:14 AM EST
    had a huge advantage.  The Viet Cong weren't sending terrorists to the U.S..  The Viet Cong weren't publishing Terror Technology How-To manuals in English.  The Viet Cong didn't have planet spanning networks of internet connected sympathizers.  The Viet Cong had no hate spewing cult leaders.  The Viet Cong had no global ambitions.  They wanted their country back and that was it.

    Parent
    No, the North Vietnamese they had plenty of (1.00 / 1) (#46)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:14:53 AM EST
    "Useful Idiots" in the US supporting them.

    Many are still around.

    Parent

    Jim, it's not still 1968 (5.00 / 1) (#78)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:21:18 PM EST
    and those pinkos Bobby Kennedy and and Martin have been dead and buried for a long time.

    And you still never went to Vietnam.

    Parent

    jondee and shoephone (1.00 / 1) (#103)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:10:08 PM EST
    I have never said what I did or where I went during my service in Naval Aviation.

    Please quit telling lies.

    And the people who really know it is not 1968 is the ones that died because of the useful idiots, fellow travelers and others  doing things that extended the war.

    But there is one thing for sure.

    Whatever I did is more than either of you.

    We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
    For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
    Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
    This day shall gentle his condition;
    And gentlemen in England now a-bed
    Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
    And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
    That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.
    Shakespeare Henry V

    Parent
    Oh brother... (5.00 / 1) (#104)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:12:37 PM EST
    So you fought at the Battle of Agincourt? (5.00 / 5) (#107)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:17:30 PM EST
    No.

    The truth is still that you never fought anywhere.

    Parent

    Did Jondee or any of the others going after Jim (1.67 / 3) (#189)
    by Green26 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 11:17:16 PM EST
    ever serve in the military? If not, you are hypocrites. I assume most of the hypocrites would be afraid to even touch a gun, or be close to one.

    Parent
    I've handled plenty of guns, as#hole (5.00 / 1) (#190)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 11:43:49 PM EST
    Go try and pick a fight somewhere else.

    Parent
    Jondee, I asked if you had been in the military (none / 0) (#202)
    by Green26 on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:08:45 AM EST
    Said nothing about whether you had handled guns.

    Have you been in the military?

    Parent

    Actually your statement was not just a statementpj (5.00 / 2) (#205)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:19:23 AM EST
    on military service. You made an assumption that most of the people critizing jim would be afraid to even touch a gun, or be close to one.

    That is a false statement as you well know since people have told you numerous times that you don't know what the Fck you are talking about.

    Parent

    I Have... (5.00 / 3) (#200)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:02:21 AM EST
    ...and unlike Jim I am a veteran of foreign war.

    Jim is also a proven liar, and while I don't doubt he served, I am positive it isn't anywhere near the capacity in which he keeps alluding to.

    My guess, Jim was a professional paper shuffler.

    For the record, your notion that military people handle guns as just plain wrong, we shot .45's that were modified to shoot .22 shells.  It was about a 2 hour class and hour at a very small indoor range.

    I grew up on a farm and am very comfortable with a guns.

    What this has to do with anything, who knows, you made no real point other than saying people who haven't been in the military are hypocrites, does that include you ?

    Parent

    Scott, I said that people attacking (none / 0) (#204)
    by Green26 on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:19:07 AM EST
    Jim, who has said he was in the military, are being hypocritical if they hadn't also served in the military. That was my point, and that is what I had said. Don't recall that you were one who'd been attacking Jim over his military service, but maybe you were. Anyway, you say have been in the military, so you wouldn't be in my hypocrite category.

    I didn't serve in the military. However, one of my sons was an Army Ranger who went to Iraq twice, as the head of a sniper unit, fought in the Anbar provence in Fallujah and Ramadi before and during the Surge, fought south of Baghdad in a tough area, and was based on the edge of Sadr City in his second deployment. Got a 4-inch deep shrapnel wound, among other things, in his first deployment, but stayed in the fight and refused to come back to the US ahead of his guys. Enlisted after 9/11. Is a pretty tough kid. Is now a lawyer.

    Parent

    Many of us who have not served in (5.00 / 2) (#207)
    by MO Blue on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:31:54 AM EST
    the military have family members who fought bravely in the country's wars. Many were injured, won medals or were killed in service to their country. We honor their service as well as your sons.

    Our families shed blood for our country and we have every right as citizens to critisize jim for using his non combat military service as a rational for advocating for war including slaughtering women and children.

    Parent

    Bingo! (none / 0) (#113)
    by shoephone on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:33:38 PM EST
    Eternal redux. This same exact swill (5.00 / 1) (#112)
    by shoephone on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:32:56 PM EST
    has been posted, word for word, ad nauseum. Maybe you should copyright it. Sadly, it's still just as meaningless this time as it was all those previous times.

    Yawn.

    Parent

    Heh. (none / 0) (#80)
    by shoephone on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:24:59 PM EST
    Are you sure? (none / 0) (#128)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:08:03 PM EST
    I could've sworn I saw him running across the Mekong Delta towards a Red Cross Truck.(Or, maybe it was just a white lunch wagon, not sure) I mean, literally, running across the top of the water from where we were in the sand swamps towards the pristine, aromatic Wagon.

    I remember thinking, "I always wondered if it was really possible? (Like on Myth Busters) You know, if you move your feet fast enough could you make it across a river without drowning?

    Well, I got my answer, no one moves their feet faster than a naval (navel?) aviation cat.

    p.s. and, before you go off the deep end here, Jim, you know I don't pile on, just havin a little fun at your expense. But, if memory serves me, you don't roll with it too well, oh well.

    Parent

    You mean like a Jesus Lizard? (none / 0) (#135)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:39:42 PM EST
    I think if any of these eternal non-combatant keyboard commandos ever got near actual combat, they'd have to run sideways to keep from flying.

    Parent
    Shooter, it all depends (none / 0) (#142)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:02:04 PM EST
    Now since the Titans actually won a game yesterday I am happy to accept the ribbing from you.

    The others? No. I lost my sense of humor with jondee, Scott, shoephone, et al years ago.

    Parent

    not enough to go away though (5.00 / 1) (#144)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:05:35 PM EST
    You know what, you're right (none / 0) (#161)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:08:03 PM EST
    This year, three wins,
    next year...........SUPER BOWL!!

    Parent
    yeah (none / 0) (#169)
    by FlJoe on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:37:11 PM EST
    especially that mean old "et al", we all know how terrified you are of consensus.

    Parent
    Like (none / 0) (#48)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:24:34 AM EST
    most conservatives you seem to have a boulder on your shoulder over Vietnam. It's one of the reasons you can't recognize bad policy decisions apparently. You know, boulders clog your eyesight.

    Parent
    Millions died. GA (2.00 / 1) (#54)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:32:46 AM EST
    That kinda bothers me.

    And you have to admit a problem exists before it can be cured.

    Do you think the radical islamists haven't recognized how the Left opposed the war?  How the Democrats finally surrendered??

    You think our enemies are stupid. That is pure bigotry.

    Parent

    From (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 10:42:05 AM EST
    the same guy who thinks it's okay to mass murder children because of their religious beliefs. Yeah, nobody's buying your nonsense.

    It's all about the boulder on your shoulder.

    Parent

    Ga I don't (none / 0) (#71)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 11:20:08 AM EST
    GA, I don't mind your usual lies.

    But parsing my position that HAMAS using civilians as human shields for their launching sites into Israel doesn't mean that Israel can't respond.

    The killers are HAMAS and Hezbollah.

    But the use of civilians in war is a long time practice. The Soviets used them to walk ahead of their tanks to clear mine fields.

    The radical islamists raped women in Iraq, and thus being spoiled, forced them to wear bomb belts to blow themselves up in crowded areas killing other civilians.

    Parent

    But, the Soviets (none / 0) (#91)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:46:48 PM EST
    used German civilians, so, that was o.k. They made them sew little cloth swastikas on their lapels to make identification easier. Actually, the Soviets were very smart. They distributed photos of Dresden after the bombing, so most of the Germans volunteered to clear the minefields.

    Parent
    I'm not sure what you are saying (none / 0) (#100)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:02:28 PM EST
    They distributed photos of Dresden after the bombing, so most of the Germans volunteered to clear the minefields.

    The issue that Ga, jondee, et al keeps raising is that it is horrible that Israel attacks locations where HAMAS and Hezbollah have stashed weapons and launched rockets into Israel because HAMAS and Hezbollah have also placed civilians at the same location.

    I support Israels actions. According to Ga, et al, that makes me a baby killer. Of course the killers are the people placing the civilians in harms way.

    BTW - The Soviets also used Poles and other Soviets who were "out of favor."

    The larger point is that civilians get killed during war. Terrible but true.

    Of course the second point is that the war is fought so that your civilians aren't the ones getting killed.

    That doesn't seem to resonate with Ga,et al.

    Parent

    Better Watch Out Jim... (none / 0) (#102)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:08:26 PM EST
    ...some Israelis have joined the collision to fight the war on christmas.

    Israeli Activists Protest Jerusalem Christmas Event


    The group gathered outside Jerusalem's YMCA building chanting "The Arabs won't defeat us with knifes, and the Christians won't buy us with presents," Israel National News reported. "Jews want a hanukkiah [menorah], not a fir tree," the group shouted.

    I am sure Bilbo O'Reilly is on top of it.

    Parent

    Sounds like a 5th Column group (none / 0) (#141)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:57:47 PM EST
    that also supports Obama.

    Parent
    You're not sure what I'm saying? (none / 0) (#159)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:04:15 PM EST
    Hey, I succeeded.

    No, really, I was just making a sarcastic remark that after the Germans saw what Dresden looked like after the bombing, they'd rather walk as human mine sweepers than go home to a burnt out city.

    Parent

    It might be time (none / 0) (#56)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:37:27 AM EST
    To think about writing yourself up some new material.   The cut and paste nonsense you have been using for years seems to be getting a diminish in response.   And you don't want that.

    Parent
    The truth doesn't change (none / 0) (#58)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:39:12 AM EST
    Vietnam........bad policy ? (none / 0) (#52)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:28:22 AM EST
    NOW you tell me!

    But, we did make the world safe for democracy.

    Parent

    LOL (none / 0) (#53)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:30:43 AM EST
    Vietnam and the sixties are Jim's Rosebud.. (none / 0) (#79)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:23:18 PM EST
    as in Citizen Kane..

    Parent
    Really glad (none / 0) (#85)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:36:51 PM EST
    You clarified that

    Parent
    Sarcasm won't get you far with me, young man (none / 0) (#90)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:45:10 PM EST
    What sarcasm (none / 0) (#101)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:03:29 PM EST
    Clarification sparred me the mental image of his rosebud.

    Parent
    Spit take...you just made reading this sub-thread (none / 0) (#114)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:36:33 PM EST
    worthwhile

    Parent
    See open (none / 0) (#122)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:51:19 PM EST
    Aaargh! Did you really have to go there? (none / 0) (#140)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:56:31 PM EST
    ;-D

    Parent
    Why do (none / 0) (#31)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:41:12 AM EST
    you assume that they have "global ambitions"?

    What they keep saying is that what they want is for us to stop bombing Syria.

    Parent

    Lentinel, (4.00 / 1) (#33)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:55:33 AM EST
    before the onslaught reigns down on you here, and, you further embarrass yourself, Please google, ISIS, Global Ambitions, and get a little education.

    It has been their stated goal to establish a Caliphate over the entire world. Those who will not convert to Islam will be killed. No, ifs, ands, or buts........killed!


    Parent

    You are (none / 0) (#37)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:00:11 AM EST
    So wasting your time.  And you are entirely correct.

    Parent
    Hey, you know....... (none / 0) (#44)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:10:45 AM EST
    Before I was a Marine, I was a Boy Scout, and, I still help wobbly ladies cross the street.

    Parent
    I steal their walkers (none / 0) (#45)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:14:30 AM EST
    O.K. that was funny (none / 0) (#64)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 10:42:20 AM EST
    laughed out loud, dammit!

    Parent
    Well as shooter wrote (none / 0) (#47)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:23:15 AM EST
    and this was stated almost 19 years ago.

    And as I have posted time and again.

    REPORTER: Mr. Bin Ladin, will the end of the United States' presence in Saudi Arabia, their withdrawal, will that end your call for jihad against the United States and against the US ?

    BIN LADIN: ....So, the driving-away jihad against the US does not stop with its withdrawal from the Arabian peninsula, but rather it must desist from aggressive intervention against Muslims in the whole world.

    That's from a March 97 interview with CNN's Peter Arnett.

    Just think how many people would be alive if we had taken his words seriously.

    And in case you missed 3 grade geography the US is part of "the whole world."

    Parent

    Yeah (none / 0) (#51)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:27:53 AM EST
    if George W. Bush had just taken that PDB serioulsy and not disbanded the terrorism force maybe we would have close to 3,000 New Yorkers alive today. And maybe if he had taken the air quality problem seriously we wouldn't have had more NYer's get sick and some die from that.

    But hey, they were just blue state liberals more than likely so they're not worth worrying about when you got embryos to save and women to control. The more blue staters that die the better I guess in the world of wingnut welfare.

    Parent

    GA, as I have posted time and (none / 0) (#57)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:38:01 AM EST
    again, Bush's NSA called a meeting in 7/5 and warned all the departments of what the CIA had warned of.

    That was 32 days before the PDB.

    So your claim is just so fake. And you know it. You are just using people's lives to push a political agenda.

    "At the special meeting on July 5 were the FBI, Secret Service, FAA, Customs, Coast Guard, and Immigration. We told them that we thought a spectacular al Qaeda terrorist attack was coming in the near future." That had been had been George Tenet's language. "We asked that they take special measures to increase security and surveillance. Thus, the White House did ensure that domestic law enforcement including the FAA knew that the CSG believed that a major al Qaeda attack was coming, and it could be in the U.S., and did ask that special measures be taken."

    Link

    Parent

    Nope (none / 0) (#65)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 10:43:57 AM EST
    that information has been undercut in recent news. However I don't expect the wingnut welfare brigade to give up their Bush apologia and thanks for reinforcing what I already knew about you and other Bush apologists.

    Parent
    Really??? (none / 0) (#69)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 11:10:48 AM EST
    Really??? How about some links rather than unsupported claims.

    Parent
    How many people would be alive.. (none / 0) (#81)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:25:37 PM EST
    minus 3000..

    Parent
    How Many if Reagan... (none / 0) (#93)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 02:10:17 PM EST
    ...didn't give Bin Laden & Co billions of dollars in arms and quash a deal the Soviets were trying to make in order to withdrawal.  

    This battle would not have happened:

    The battle lasted for about a week. Bin Laden and 50 Arab volunteers faced 200 Russian troops. ... The Arab volunteers took casualties but held out under intense fire for several days. More than a dozen of bin Laden's comrades were killed, and bin Laden himself apparently suffered a foot wound. ... Chronicled daily at the time by several Arab journalists ... the battle of Jaji marked the birth of Osama bin Laden's public reputation as a warrior among Arab jihadists. ... After Jaji he began a media campaign designed to publicize the brave fight waged by Arab volunteers who stood their ground against a superpower. In interviews and speeches ... bin Laden sought to recruit new fighters to his cause and to chronicle his own role as a military leader. He also began to expound on expansive new goals for the jihad.

    LINK

    I know Jimmy Carter, FDR, and Kennedy are all at fault.

    But had Reagan left well enough alone, GWB might not have had to screw the pouch on the BL memo.

    Parent

    Well Reagan supported Al Queda to (none / 0) (#94)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 02:15:22 PM EST
    defeat the commies, and he supported the religious right in order to defeat the commie-Democrats.

    And in both instances, we've been stuck with em ever since.

    Parent

    I Know... (none / 0) (#96)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 02:44:24 PM EST
    ...the republican Jesus, Ronald Reagan sold arms to Iran and gave them to Bin Laden, and Jim votes republican because they are the better at National Security.  Although the truth disagrees strenuously.

    Parent
    Scott, you missed some of the good stuff (none / 0) (#139)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:56:00 PM EST
    Reagan can't be blamed for ignoring the threat of Osama Bin Laden. Not for another few years would any analyst see Bin Laden as a significant player in global terrorism; not till the mid-1990s would his organization, al-Qaida, emerge as a significant force.

    However, Reagan--and those around him--can be blamed for ignoring the rise of Islamic militancy in Afghanistan and for failing to see Gorbachev's offer to withdraw as an opportunity to clamp the danger. Certainly, the danger was, or should have been, clear. Only a few years had passed since the Ayatollah Khomeini rose to power in Iran--the shah toppled, the U.S. Embassy employees held hostage, the country turned over to the mullahs, the region suddenly destabilized. Reagan beat Jimmy Carter so decisively in the 1980 election in part because of the hostage crisis.

    Of course this has to be seen in context.

    Reagan--and those around him--can be blamed for ignoring the rise of Islamic militancy in Afghanistan and for failing to see Gorbachev's offer to withdraw as an opportunity to clamp the danger. Certainly, the danger was, or should have been, clear.

    The Soviets had been the enemy for years and years. And we had just been using the guerrillas as  surrogates in our war with the Soviets by supplying weapons to them. Suddenly deciding that the Soviets would withdraw and joining them in attacking our previous allies would have been a bit of a reach.

    Of course all of this is Monday morning QBing, even the fact Carter is the guy who allowed the Shah to be toppled and started the whole bloody mess.

     

    Parent

    Carter established. Wahabism in Saudi Arabia? (none / 0) (#143)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:03:08 PM EST
    no, he didn't.

    Do some research on who's sending money to ISIS; it isn't Iran.

    Jesus, turn off the talk radio for five minutes and effing educate yourself before spouting off.

    Parent

    ISIS is just the latest (none / 0) (#184)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:05:07 PM EST
    and they exist because of the prior...

    Parent
    The point is, the "prior" (none / 0) (#193)
    by jondee on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 12:38:55 AM EST
    didn't start with Jimmy Carter.

    And wishing your abridged, heavily edited version of history were true doesn't make it so.

    Parent

    I Didn't Miss It... (none / 0) (#201)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:04:31 AM EST
    ...he still armed the guy, never claimed he knew he was arming, but that is the central point, Reagan armed radicals who he know nothing about and one of them was BL.

    Parent
    Donald is capable of much better commenting, Red (5.00 / 1) (#36)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:58:34 AM EST
    But on this subject he's been flinging feces.

    Cognitive dissonance is taking its toll on all of us.  Millions of years of evolutionarily advantageous protective mechanisms are in conflict with our superficial ideals.

    Most of us are teetering atop personal soapboxes.  But most of those soapboxes aren't anchored to solid ground.  They're adrift on a seesaw sea of bull$hit.

    "Black Widow" is a common species ... (5.00 / 1) (#66)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 10:55:49 AM EST
    ... of venomous spider, and it's also the name of a mediocre 1957 film starring Ginger Rogers and Van Heflin, and an only marginally better 1987 film noir starring Debra Winger and Theresa Russell.

    The word "widow" specifically refers to a surviving female spouse. (Please note the emphasis on the word "surviving.") The black widow spider receives its name because the female sometimes kills and eats the male immediately after mating with him.

    Now, the notion as to whether or not Tashfeen Malik is responsible for Syed Rizwan Farook's radicalization or vice versa, or whether they both plunged down that rabbit hole together in willing tandem, is entirely speculative at this point.

    And since Malik not only did not survive her husband, but instead died alongside him in that shootout with police, your use of the label "black widow" in reference to her is both inapplicable and stupid, and perhaps even sexist as well in your assumption that she somehow preyed upon him.

    Further, in your case the use of "San Bernardino Black Widow" is not even original. You simply read it somewhere else, and thought it sounded cool.

    And that's the sum total of the contribution you bring to this discussion -- reciting someone else's talking points.

    Aloha.

    And maybe not (none / 0) (#68)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 11:08:45 AM EST
    It has been reported that the wife was the leader in the radicalization process.

    That means she is the direct cause of the husband's radicalization and death.

    So "Black Widow" seems appropriate if not completely accurate in that she did not survive, although her survival is not her fault.

    Thanks for all the blathers re the spider. I am sure no one here knew any of that.

    And please try to think up some new insults. The ones you have been using have become boring and an indication that you have lived a sheltered life.
     

    Parent

    It has not been reported as such, Jim. (none / 0) (#165)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:28:17 PM EST
    It's merely been the repeated speculation of babbling wingbats with too much time on their hands, as well as the perhaps-wishful thinking of Farook's friends in SoCal, who are quite understandably distraught at what happened, and have had a hard time understanding and rationalizing how a man they thought they knew could perpetrate such a horrific act.

    While it's certainly possible that Farook was influenced by Malik, it's also just as possible that he influenced her. Further, it's also possible that each were already radicalized already when they first met in Saudi Arabia, and formed a bond based on their mutual affinity for Islamic fundamentalism and high-powered automatic weaponry.

    And since they're now both dead, it's probably unlikely that we'll ever know for certain who first jumped down the rabbit hole of religious extremism, or whether they simply held hands and made a mutual pact to leap together into oblivion and infamy.

    And yet, the only facts that thus far underscore any such speculation are the initial disclosures that: (a) Malik had allegedly pledged her fealty and allegiance to ISIS leader Bakr al-Baghdadi in a Facebook post which was apparently deleted prior to the assault; and (b) Farook apparently stopped attending mosque after getting married.

    Never mind that Farook had his own contacts with persons who were themselves associated with extremist elements, or that the couple first met while Farook was on Hajj in Saudi Arabia, a nation whose own very assertive and puritanical brand of Wahhabism has radicalized so many young Sunni Muslims, male and female alike, over the decades.

    All it takes for you and Redbrow to complete the circle is to then leap to an assumption of facts not yet in evidence, that Malik was somehow a browbeating fundamentalist shrew while for his part, Farook was a willing doormat without an original thought of his own.

    And again, never mind that Sunni Islam is a very patriarchal religion which recognizes a husband's dominance and wife's subservience as tantamount during their married life together as a couple, or that according to his friends, family and his own dating file posted on BestMuslim.com, Farook considered himself a very devout Muslim.

    But then, Jim, you've certainly had plenty of experience in twisting facts and statements to comport with your own paranoid worldview, and you've further had lots of practice with assuming facts not yet in evidence. So why should today be any different, eh?

    :-|

    Parent

    Yeah I gotta quit reading that far right (none / 0) (#183)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:03:47 PM EST
    site Huffington Post.

    And BTW,it was a bomb that took the Russian airliner down.

    But hey! Who immediately said that??

    Why me.

    Fancy that.

    Parent

    You can't handle facts, Jim. (5.00 / 1) (#196)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 03:30:34 AM EST
    That's why you constantly seek to change the subject, or engage in name-calling. You don't ever really listen to anybody. Instead, you browbeat, demean and regularly impugn the integrity of others, and your comments often constitute nothing more than repeated full frontal assaults on logic, reason and accountability.

    Have a nice day.

    Parent

    Why is it ok for Obama (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:31:53 PM EST
    To say "We're working with Turkey to seal its border with Syria." but it is horrible to suggest sealing our borders from potential Islamist terrorists?

    Obama did it again (3.00 / 2) (#97)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 02:46:23 PM EST
    His gun-grabber rhetoric has sparked gun sales yet again.

    Gun store shelves are emptying and the background check system is being overloaded.

    Gun salesperson of the year for seven years straight.

    That is More of a Comment... (5.00 / 1) (#99)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:02:25 PM EST
    ...on the right's paranoia than Obama.

    I mean seriously, you are slamming Obama because you think he is responsible for more gun sales ?  Would it be too much to ask that you not slam him for wanting fewer guns sold and in the same thread, slam him for more being sold.

    But you are entertaining, I will give you that.

    Parent

    Who os lam,img him? (none / 0) (#105)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:15:52 PM EST
    I think it is womderful that people who were on the fence about buying a firearm have beem spurred into action.

    Every responsible law-abiding citizens should use their constitutionl right to be prepared defend themselves and their loved ones.

    Obama might be responsible for more gun sales than any single person in history. That is an incredblide legacy.

    Parent

    They just can't fake it well (5.00 / 2) (#121)
    by sj on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:50:32 PM EST
    I think it is womderful [sic] that people who were on the fence about buying a firearm have beem [sic]spurred into action.
    ...says the man who only comments earlier said ...
    I am a left leaning liberal so I can do it.
    On the other hand, he only said he was a left-leaning liberal because he wanted to call other people "morons". Why do wing-nuts write such nonsensical BS. How can they turn off the thinking process?

    Or is it that you somehow never quite turned it on.

    Parent

    So no democrats (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:50:20 PM EST
    Support the constitutional roght to bear arms?

    No democrats own guns?

    I did not say I am a democrat.

    I had to switch my registration because from the current toxic mimic of the democratic party to no affiliation because I actually still believe in the constitution, free speech, self-defense, and personal resposibility.

    Parent

    See what I mean? (5.00 / 2) (#150)
    by sj on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:32:18 PM EST
    So no democrats  (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:50:20 PM MDT

    Support the constitutional roght to bear arms?

    You just don't know how to maintain the masquerade. No "left-leaning liberal" would make the mistake of conflating "liberal" and "democrats".

    Almost no Democrat would continue typing it with a small "d" (the caveat is that not all Democrats are good typists).

    If one only leans left, it is unlikely that person would self-describe as "liberal". For reference, look at Zorba's or Anne's or my liberal declarations. There is nothing in there so mealy-mouthed as "leaning".

    As I said, most trolls don't have a clue how to maintain the masquerade.

    I do concede however that being a liberal is no guarantee that one knows how to type so your poor skills in that area weren't a giveaway.

    Parent

    I support the Second Amendment (none / 0) (#195)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 01:31:06 AM EST
    and I'm a Democrat. The Second Amendment is one away from the Fourth (the Third being obsolete.) I don't advocate giving up any constitutional right.

    Parent
    Yeah... (none / 0) (#126)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:03:39 PM EST
    ..."Obama did it again", doesn't actually mean Obama did it again, noted.

    Good thing the paranoid idiots who are buying them aren't responsible for sales going up...

    I forget the exact numbers, but after Sandy Hook almost all sales were going to people who already owned guns.  I would imagine the same is true now, but I do not know, but I am sure we will know soon enough.

    I wonder how many of those purchases will be used to kill people, or as you put it, how many of those legal guns will become illegal.

    Parent

    Why aren't the progressives (2.25 / 4) (#14)
    by Redbrow on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 10:43:10 PM EST
    Raging on twitter about Obama's use of "thugs" and mention of god three times?

    Who knows which god but Christians were lambasted for offering prayers to their god.

    The gun control measures would not have prevented the christmas party massacre.

    The muslim terroristts were not on the no fly list.

    TheSan  Bernardino Black Widow was able to waltz into America thanks to an Obama Adminstration streamlined visa process that can be performed online without having to ever meet an immigration official in person. She even gave a fake address.

    And no ties to other islamic terror groups...except for Syed being in contact with ISIS recruiter Muhamed Hassan who came to minnesota as a refugee from Somalia before thanking a,erica by becoming one of the most notorius "radicalizers".

    Oh those poor persecuted christians. (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:05:34 AM EST
    Look. No one lambasted christians for offering prayers. What was lambasted were politicians who say they will pray for the victims and do NOTHING ELSE!

    Parent
    Thanks for the rote recitation ... (1.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:50:13 AM EST
    ... of wingbat talking points. I somehow missed my uncle's at Thanksgiving.

    "The San Bernardino Black Widow." Catchy, but inaccurate because she's dead.

    Please call us when you actually have an original thought.

    Parent

    Basically (none / 0) (#1)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 07:40:55 PM EST
    what I got from what I saw of the speech is that terrorism now is going low tech taking advantage of lax gun laws and quiet.

    They used illegal firearms (3.50 / 2) (#15)
    by Redbrow on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 10:52:06 PM EST
    Just like the terrorists in "gun-free" france.

    Parent
    No not just like France (2.00 / 1) (#70)
    by CST on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 11:11:39 AM EST
    The people in France were highly coordinated and organized.  Soldiers, if you will.  They had to be.

    At least over there they make you work for it.  That's probably why it happens a lot less.

    Parent

    And Bought Them... (2.00 / 1) (#77)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:17:28 PM EST
    ...or rather had someone else buy them where guns are readily available.  Those illegal guns, were not so long ago legal ones and maybe if we have any laws about selling guns, that person may have not sold them to a terrorist.

    Again, your arguments are only pointing out the flaws of lax gun laws.

    For the record, California is not gun free,l it's like English is your second language because you clearly don't have a grasp of what words mean.

    I guess memorizing talking points doesn't leave much room for thought.

    Parent

    The guns used were not readily available (none / 0) (#83)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:33:09 PM EST

    Fully automatic guns are not widely available that is why they illegally altered them which is a major federal felony.

    Installing normal capacity AR15 magazines was illegal. Such magazines are not available in CA because anything over 10 rounds is a felony.

    Quick reloading guns are illegal in CA. Altering legal guns to make them quick to reload is a felony in CA.

    Pivate transfer of firearms in CA requires used of a FFL licensed dealer and background checks. That was a nother felony commited by these muslim terrorisrs.

    Then there is the illegal bomb factory and dozens of illegal bombs.

    You are the one going off half-cocked without facts or reading comprehension.

    Parent

    I See You Discovered... (none / 0) (#98)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 02:52:46 PM EST
    ...a new toy, the rating button.  FYI a '1' is a troll rating, that would be you, if you disagree, use a '2' so you come across as a buffoon, but not posting is you best bet if that is your goal.

    I guess it's a complete mystery as to how they got them if everything is illegal,  I mean it would take a diabolical genius to figure what to do if the purchases were illegal in California.

    Wait, I take that back, you figured it out.  Let me revamp, the laws we have are so weak that even a child can figure how to circumvent them.

    Once again, you proved the very point I was making.

    Parent

    Um.... (none / 0) (#136)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:44:01 PM EST
    I did use a 2.

    Who is the bufoon again?

    Parent

    You're not a buffoon. (5.00 / 1) (#171)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:44:16 PM EST
    By your own admission, you're a left-leaning liberal, a curious trait which Jim would no doubt otherwise equate with buffoonery -- were it not, of course, for your mutual affinity for the same right-wing talking points, which is even more curious given your assertion that you're actually a liberal.

    Oy caramba.

    Parent

    Didn't see it (none / 0) (#2)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 07:48:52 PM EST
    I forgot.

    Actually sounds sort of......presidential.

    It was actually (none / 0) (#3)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 07:56:01 PM EST
    one of his best. He started at the beginning 9/11 and talked about everything that has been going on since then. What is going on now. He's finally EXPLAINING to Americans in clear plain language. I was amazed.

    Parent
    One of His Best ? (5.00 / 1) (#88)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:43:13 PM EST
    I though it was so/so at best, and some of it was clearly directed at the people who don't give a F what Obama has to say.

    I guess if you are the type to need a authority figure tell you it's going to be alright, well then it probably was pretty good.  But if you are living in reality, you know guns ain't going no where and America is hapless in not escalating conflict.  IMO it's not alright, and to me, this is going to be like mass shootings, more and more lone/small attacks, especially since we are giving them the air time and the  reaction they crave.

    There is no real plan for guns or ISIL beyond keep doing what we are doing.

    This has nothing to do with the words, but he was looking at the camera really weird near the end.  Someone else mentioned looking like Nixon, I don't know, but it was a intense stare that creeped me out a bit because he was reading the teleprompter at the same time.  

    I generally like Obama's special speeches, not this one.

    Parent

    Agreed. (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by KeysDan on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:10:24 PM EST
    I found the President's address a little flat, glossing over the curvature of the rolling and roiling landscape of the Middle East and Southern California.

     A sense of exasperation was detected in having to re-state the many steps already being taken to confront ISIS which have had mixed results at best (e.g., supporting the "good" rebels) and those new and stepped up(e.g.,bombing oil tankers, visa reviews). However, the best reiterated statement was no ground troops, although we know that special forces are being added incrementally.

    The geopolitical aspects were avoided such as the proxy war to marginalize Russian influence in the area and the proxy war to topple Assad with the US and the Saudis in one corner and Russia and Iran in the other, and everyone now on the ropes.  

    The speech's raison d'etre --the San Bernardino terrorist attack--and its generation of fear, may not be abated by a pledge to eventually obliterate ISIS (although it cuts the Republican bombing off at the pass) as much as a presidential tutorial in risks to, and in,  a democracy.  A much needed education, despite the Republicans customary reactionary response.

     Indeed, after ISIS fades, it is likely to be replaced with yet another barbaric offshoot.  And, the specific case at hand appears to have been "inspired" by ISIS--an inspiration wrapped up in an idea, implemented by a homegrown Islamic extremist and his green-card wife. Tough to beat with a drone.

    An American- born citizen, raised and educated in San Bernardino, employed by the County health department sought out a bride on sort of a "Muslim Mingle" matrimony hook-up, finds a Pakistani-born, Saudi raised, expat educated as a pharmacist back in Pakistan, and returns to the US to become the married couple, Mr. and Mrs. Farook.

    The newlyweds have a baby (perhaps as a means to validate the marriage as being non-fraudulent) and plan a horrific act at the husband's workplace and, maybe, at other sites.  

     The upshot being that, unlike the Paris terror attack, this is an unusual and unlikely terrorist scenario.  The fear from the attack can't be minimized and the statistics even if l in l million are too much for the "l",  but it can be put into its proper place alongside our multi-faceted fight against ISIS abroad.    

    Parent

    "Holy post-partum, Batman!" (5.00 / 1) (#147)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:19:24 PM EST
    If certain people had their way, we'd probably be investigating all Muslim-American couples who recently had a baby.

    As an aside, I've just started to re-read Al Gore's 2007 book, "The Assault on Reason." The problem he cited and described in detail, which is our political class's then-growing propensity to ignore facts and analysis when considering serious policy decisions, only seems to be getting much worse of late.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    After reflection (none / 0) (#155)
    by christinep on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:55:24 PM EST
    KeysDan: In this atmosphere of disunity and exacerbated division, would any speech do more than sort-of satisfy a plurality?  I've been thinking about the apparent reality that a good portion of the public want to hear something tough and decisive while the other large portion of Americans want to avoid or lessen the chance of increased war-like footing.  On top of that, there is Maslow.  

    Remembering fundamentals about fear and security, it seems that we are at the basic needs level as to security.  When people are afraid, the visceral supersedes the mental.  Maybe not meatloaf, but we do seek understanding and comfort and the assurance that everything will be ok in the end.  I think that is where we are here... a hard place to be for those with a decidedly intellectual bent.  We may be going through a transition where the words of the learned, of the teachers, of the methodologists cannot be heard because many, who were emotionally battered by earlier demoralizing wars and losses during the big recession, first seek the comfort of "I feel your pain."

    Whether it is validation that is needed or comfort or images of a "strong" man, these turbulent times--anywhere--offer fertile ground to waiting demagogues IF the fears of the citizenry are dismissed too readily.  Trump and Cruz, among others, are ready with their own brand of modern demagoguery. (For starters, see Mr. Trumps call today for barring entry into the US of all Muslims.)

    Parent

    Yes, it is important (none / 0) (#162)
    by KeysDan on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:16:37 PM EST
    to dial down emotions and try to make a rational assessment of the threat faced.  But, I do agree that this is easier said than done, and, can't be dismissed as frivolous.

    The president, however, in addition to the military and political steps occurring and contemplated, is in a position to identify mistaken and distorted thoughts that generate distress, and then challenge and correct them.

      He needs to repeat often that although terrible terrorist attack have happened, the country is not in peril and such attacks are incapable of destroying us or coming close to ending civilization.  Indeed, it is not a clash of civilizations, since ISIS and what it represents, is not a polar opposite.  

    When a terrorist attack occurs, such as by the Farooks, the president has to assist all of us in realizing that our estimation of the danger is exaggerated by our fear. It is a human emotion. It behooves the president, not only as commander in chief, but reality therapist in chief, to understand that there is no way to eradicate all risk, even if we delude ourselves into believing that trading away liberty for safety in accord with some Republican goals, will do the trick.


    Parent

    An appropriate title (none / 0) (#174)
    by christinep on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:12:00 PM EST
    "reality therapist is chief"  Fortunately--in the long run--this national therapist far surpasses the "bring-em-on" style of our earlier doc.

    Parent
    I wonder if the moron (none / 0) (#5)
    by jondee on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 08:14:38 PM EST
    will stop whining about Obama "refusing to mention radical muslims" now..

    Parent
    Yes...plain, direct, declarative sentences (none / 0) (#8)
    by christinep on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 08:28:44 PM EST
    The venue of the Oval Office, the strong and straightforward voice, active rather than subjunctive.  The thrust from the start of his address to the people is directed toward our ongoing & heightened effort to combat terrorism in all its morphed forms here and elsewhere.  Smart & strong as motif.

    Significantly, I think: The President set up the pressing matter of rampant guns here without getting snagged or trapped into making that the focus ... and so, wisely, the President kept a laser focus on assessing & acting on the reality and fear of ISIS/ISIL rather than get absorbed by the always-divisive gun issue.  Other than references to the absurdity of allowing via loophole those on the no-fly list to buy guns, President Obama made our response to the ISIS/ISIL threat the needed center of his policy against terrorism.

    In my ears & eyes, the talk had to be made.  And, the timing and balance should satisfy--at least, for now--growing concern and/or concern in the American polity.  

    Parent

    too politically correct (none / 0) (#9)
    by thomas rogan on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 09:14:14 PM EST
    Man for man, the Israeli army and the Kurdish army are the best in the world.  We should arm them and cut them loose to invade ISIS and meet in the middle.  Who cares if the Arab world complains; they've done nothing but create this ISIS mess and give us Wahabi extremists.

    We should arm Israel? (5.00 / 4) (#10)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 09:45:44 PM EST
    I was under the impression that the U.S. spent billions each year providing Israel military aid. Correct me if I'm wrong but currently isn't there a 2007 10-year agreement guaranteeing Israel $3.1 billion annually which expires in 2017. Israel has reportedly asked that this agreement be extended and increased to as much as $5 billion per year.

    And it is your opinion that the only ramifications of the U.S.  sending Israeli troops (providing they were stupid enough to do this) into Middle Eastern countries, will be complaints from the Arab countries?

    A real M.E. expert are you now? Right up there with Bush officials who claimed we would be met with flowers and candy and that the war with Iraq would cost very little and pay for itself.

    Parent

    The stupid (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by Ga6thDem on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 10:00:33 PM EST
    is getting to the point where it a red hot burn.

    Parent
    The Republicans are creating (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 10:35:26 PM EST
    a handbook called: Americans can help recruit more terrorists for ISIL... Step by step instructions on what Americans can do to radicalize Muslims in American and throughout the world.

    Parent
    IMO (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by CaptHowdy on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 10:42:18 PM EST
    ISIS is doing it.  They are very smart.  They know exactly which of Tommys buttons to push to make him dance.

    Parent
    Maybe (5.00 / 5) (#16)
    by MO Blue on Sun Dec 06, 2015 at 11:41:30 PM EST
    Or maybe many Americans, in their arrogance, know little about the world outside of their own little sphere and what they hear on TV. They think that their words and their actions have no consequences and they can snap their fingers and the world will comply. It doesn't matter that our so called M.E. strategies have been proven disasterous over and over again, they continue to find more and more counterproductive things to say and do.

    Parent
    Arrogance + Ignorance = Recklessness (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by shoephone on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 12:05:55 AM EST
    Ted Cruz's fire and brimstone speech yesterday to the faithful -- about how he's going to carpet bomb ISIS into oblivion, and can't wait to see if sand glows in the dark -- is the very illustration of recklessness.

    Have you heard the speech? The ignorant crowd rooaaared its approval. It was like an old-time revival meeting. I thought some of them might over-excite  to the point of fainting.

    I'd bet that ISIS' social media sites are salivating over that one.

    Good job, Teddy. You're giving Trump a real run for his money.

    Parent

    Maybe ISIS is supporting a GOP presidency (none / 0) (#62)
    by oculus on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 10:23:24 AM EST
    as a recruitment tool.

    Parent
    That actually makes (5.00 / 1) (#127)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:07:16 PM EST
    A lot of sense

    Parent
    Oh, how Manchurian Candidate of them! (none / 0) (#67)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 11:04:35 AM EST
    ;-D

    Parent
    If the stupid is a red hot burn, ... (none / 0) (#172)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:52:22 PM EST
    ... then the 2016 Republican presidential field is a jumbo bag of marshmallows, a box of graham crackers and a case of Hershey's chocolate bars.

    Parent
    Please don't ruin s'mores for us, Donald... (5.00 / 2) (#182)
    by Anne on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:32:16 PM EST
    better to compare them to a steaming cauldron of haggis, or maybe one of the foods on this list.

    Here's one:

    Casu Marzu, a pecorino cheese and Sardinian specialty, surely wins among most disgusting cheeses of the world. The direct translation is "rotten cheese" and rightly so: blocks of otherwise beautiful Italian pecorino cheeses are purposely prepared to become the natural breeding grounds for nests of maggots--the natural harbingers of rot and putrefaction. As if pecorino wasn't pungent enough...

    Something about "natural breeding grounds for nests of maggots--the natural harbingers of rot and putrefaction" sounds kind of familiar, doesn't it?

    So, no more comparing the field to anything that actually tastes good, okay?

    Parent

    Point well taken, Anne. (5.00 / 2) (#197)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 04:46:26 AM EST
    ;-D

    One a brighter topic, our first grandchild is coming into this world tomorrow. (His estimated due date was this coming Friday.) Elder Daughter is presently in The Queen's Medical Center, because she's became very uncomfortable this weekend and started having some small labor pains this morning.

    So, after a thorough examination and upon her doctor's recommendation tonight, she's opted to undergo a C-section due to her baby's size, which is presently estimated to be well over 11 lbs., and the fact that he's not shifted into a head-down position, but is instead pressing down butt-first against the birth canal, which has been causing her no small amount of pain and discomfort over the last few days. Her mother flew to Honolulu this afternoon to stay with her tonight, and I'll go there tomorrow afternoon.

    While Dad is understandably nervous, both Mom and their soon-to-be newborn son are otherwise doing fine, and all systems are go for 7:00 a.m. tomorrow morning. And while she's sorry about not going through natural childbirth, she's not regretting her decision to undergo the C-section. As she admitted to me on the phone tonight, she's ready for her pregnancy to be over.

    So am I, frankly. She's really ballooned in size over these last few months, and 11+ lbs. seems an awfully big baby for a first-time mother, even if she is 6'1". Her OB-GYN is very good and as she told my wife tonight, she would not have recommended the procedure save for her concern about the baby's breech position in the womb. So tomorrow will be a very momentous day for all of us.

    Aloha.

    Parent

    Nothing like being born and immediately (5.00 / 1) (#198)
    by Anne on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 06:25:31 AM EST
    wearing the 3-month size clothes!  Wow, that's a big baby!

    My older daughter is now in her 37th week, so it's getting close.  Sunday, we had her younger child's 3rd birthday party - he actually turned 3 yesterday - and now we're all scrambling to get ready for Christmas.  And, of course, we just don't know when this newest little boy is going to decide to enter the world - her due date is the 28th, but we're hoping my daughter can kind of thread the needle, and either have him in time to be home for Christmas, or have him after the big day.  We'll see!  This is the first Christmas where the older grandson really gets is, so we're hoping he's not in the midst of being shuffled around among the grandparents and the hospital!

    Will await word on your family's blessed event - am sure everyone will come through just fine; you all won't come down from this high for a while, so just enjoy it all!

    Parent

    The CouchPotato General's Order of Battle: (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 02:16:50 AM EST
    Hey, Israel - you do it.

    Unbelieveable.

    Parent

    And we have spent decades (none / 0) (#24)
    by MKS on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:58:28 AM EST
    trying to make sure Israel was kept out of wars in the Mideast.   Saddam Hussein lobbed scud missiles at them when we invaded to free Kuwait, and the Israelis did  nothing--to avoid alienating our Arab allies....

    But when you  love Armageddon, then of course you want a huge confrontation involving Israel.

    Parent

    Preview of coming attractions: (none / 0) (#145)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:07:01 PM EST
    George Lazenby was never better (none / 0) (#186)
    by McBain on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:38:26 PM EST
    Israel arms themselves dude :) (none / 0) (#30)
    by Militarytracy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:08:20 AM EST
    Some of their weaponry is the best in the world :) If you are talking about arming the Kurds, we have to a certain degree but we balk a bit. They want to break off into their own region. We really arent interested in fueling the next civil war in the region.

    Parent
    no... (none / 0) (#187)
    by thomas rogan on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 10:02:08 PM EST
    If we did what Biden said and partitioned Iraq into natural three countries rather than the artificial colonial creation that it is, then there would be three small stable countries.  If we maybe didn't have the very minority Alawite dictatorship in Syria then we wouldn't have the mess we have.  

    Parent
    No there wouldn't be (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by Militarytracy on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 08:12:01 AM EST
    You are out of your fool head. The Sunni would largely have been left out of the oil resources and the Shia would control the only route to market. Instant war....

    Joe Biden has never been all that bright when you dig into the details of any of his grand proposals :)

    Parent

    If "Freedom is More Powerful Than Fear" (none / 0) (#32)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:51:46 AM EST
    is indeed his best line, we're in for big trouble imo.

    The moment fear entered the picture in the USA, freedom went down the toilette - and fast.
    With virtually no discussion.

    Bank records, phone conversations, emails... you name it -- our privacy compromised by mutual agreement in both parties and still in force with no sign of relief.

    In our case, and it looks like the case in France, freedom is the first thing to go when fear enters the picture.

    This is not to say that all the people get fearful, although we have every right to do so, but politicians certainly use fear - or fear of fear - to grab more and more control over our lives and dilute our rights to privacy.

    I wonder what the founders of our republic would say about our knee jerk willingness to shed our freedoms.

    As Ben said,

    They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

    That would be us alas.

    The trope is B/S (5.00 / 1) (#39)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:03:39 AM EST
    Freedom is destroyed by Fear.

    Routinely.

     

    Parent

    And (none / 0) (#60)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:43:26 AM EST
    in our case, our freedoms were destroyed not by fear, but by ruthless and opportunistic politicians with a fascist agenda.

    Parent
    Three OYs (none / 0) (#38)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:02:44 AM EST
    We will fight ISIS with air strikes, special forces on the ground and working with our partners. We are working with Turkey to seal its border.

    • Special forces on the ground who will, apparently, not be wearing boots.

    • Air strikes, imo, accomplishes nothing and puts targets on our backs that would not otherwise be there.

    • Working with Turkey - big Oy. What in the world were they thinking to shoot down a Russian plane  -- and the pilots being shot at as they descended helplessly in their parachutes - shot by Syrian rebels - the ones we are arming and training...

    If fighting IS involves alliances with the likes of the current leadership in Turkey, we is in deep sh-t. Imho.

    New Rulez: "The enemy of my enemy (5.00 / 1) (#41)
    by Mr Natural on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:04:35 AM EST
    is my enemy too!"

    Parent
    Much simpler coda really (none / 0) (#43)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:06:18 AM EST
    Oh, lentinel (none / 0) (#49)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:24:47 AM EST
    "Air strikes, imo, accomplishes nothing....."

    I, humbly, bow to your indubitably superior knowledge of theater war strategy. I was just a dumbass Jarhead, who, if Sarge didn't take the barrel of my gun, point it in the direction of the jungle, and, say, "walk," I would've ended up walking, and drowning in the South China Sea instead.  

    And, the pilots were shot by Syrian rebels - the ones Turkey is arming and training....no bigee, minor boo boo.

    Parent

    Yeah... (none / 0) (#59)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:40:39 AM EST
    What you call "theatre war strategy" worked great in Vietnam didn't it? And its working wonderfully well in Afghanistan. That's why we've been at it for over a decade with no end in sight. Obama will be out of office before we're out of Afghanistan.

    My suggestion is that this is not a war that can be won with air strikes. Why? Because the "enemy" is everywhere. And they are emboldened and motivated by these air strikes on their country. People who have lost friends and family are angry, getting angrier, and getting far more sophisticated in the weaponry available to them.

    There is no central ISIS government. There is no country called ISIS. If there were, and you may claim there is, we should be talking to them instead of bombing them.

    And, jeez Shooter... you can't be serious about the shooting of those pilots. A minor boo boo?
    No. You can't be serious.

    I have to assume that that last comment by you is snark - because it is so heartless.

    Lastly, to those who say that we can't just leave, I say, hell yes we can.
    They said the same thing about Vietnam. We can't just leave - after all we've invested... and all that bs.

    And guess what?
    We left.
    And we, and Vietnam, are infinitely better off for our having done so.


    Parent

    lentinel, (none / 0) (#61)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 10:06:43 AM EST
    the minor,"boo boo," was your claiming the Syrian rebels who shot the pilots were "the ones we are arming and training..."

    In fact, as I stated, they were, and, are, armed and trained by Turkey.

    Parent

    I accept (none / 0) (#72)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 12:05:53 PM EST
    your correction...

    but for me it is a distinction without a difference since we are allied with them - and have been supporting them militarily and justifying their behavior.

    Personally, I wish we would disassociate ourselves from Turkey.
    Their current president seems like a loose cannon to me.

    With friends like that....

    Parent

    It's a distinction with a huge difference (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by CST on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 12:18:23 PM EST
    We were allied with the soviets in WW2 - that doesn't mean we were in charge of their military or justifying their behavior.

    Turkey is perfectly capable of starting $hit all on their own.

    And sure, we could disassociate from Turkey, I agree the current leadership is problematic.  But if we won't even associate with Turkey, what country can we still talk to in that region?

    As for friends - I wouldn't really call Turkey a friend.  There's a big difference between friends and useful allies.

    Parent

    The analogy (none / 0) (#92)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 02:00:21 PM EST
    that I feel re: us and Turkey is the "Cuban Missile Crisis" - in which the US said that any attack from Cuba would be considered as an attack from the USSR.

    I can't believe that the Russians could conceive of further attacks from Turkey as anything less than something sanctioned by the US.

    And it seems to me that we need Russia on our side in this fkd up enterprise - or at least not taking sides against us.

    I don't consider Turkey a friend - and after their stupid and reckless behavior in shooting down a Russian plane I don't consider them a useful ally either. Dangerous ally is more like it.
    The type of "ally" that can drag us into a nuclear confrontation.

    What we are doing in that region is a disgrace.
    An insult to intelligence.

    As Jeralyn has said many times, it puts a target on our backs... something I personally could do without.

    Parent

    Please (none / 0) (#124)
    by CST on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:58:33 PM EST
    Russia and the U.S. will not come to a nuclear confrontation over anything happening with Turkey.  They've had nukes for decades and we've fought many a proxy war since then.

    Parent
    I don't (none / 0) (#148)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:19:43 PM EST
    want us to be dragged into any confrontation with Russia.

    And Turkey has already managed to sour a rather fragile relationship.

    They, as you might recall, downed a Russian plane recently. It was totally unnecessary.

    And the pilots who had ejected, were shot at by the Syrian rebels - whom we have armed and trained. One of the pilots, helpless, was killed as he descended in his parachute.

    We do not need to be there.

    Hillary has said that it is not our war. Damn straight it isn't.

    But she wants us to lead this war that is not ours. Completely nuts.

    Our choice in the next election is likely going to be between unbalanced and psychotic.

    Parent

    lentinel, I don't call people names, (1.00 / 1) (#167)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:31:39 PM EST
    nor, do I resort, too often, to adolescent name calling. But, I don't know what to do about your continuing lying about those Syrian Rebels, especially, after you've been told the facts.

    The SYRIAN Rebels who shot the Russian pilot WERE NOT "armed and trained by us." They were armed and trained by Turkey. There are numerous factions of "Syrian Rebels." Each have loyalty to their own benefactor. Those shooters were Turkey's proxies; founded, fed, armed, and, trained by TURKEY..

    For God's sake, lentinel. I don't fool around about war, and I take offense that you treat important facts so willy Nilly. Especially, after you've been corrected once, already.

    You don't have to believe me dammit. Look it up yourself. I, happily defend your right to state your opinions here, even as it's an infinite, repetitive, continuous, unwavering loop. But, repeating lies about something as serious as who killed who....please, no.

    Parent

    As I posted before, (none / 0) (#188)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 10:27:02 PM EST
    there is a difference of opinion between you and others about who armed and trained the "Syrian Rebels".

    I will repost:

    The U.S. Congress gave final approval on Thursday to President Barack Obama's plan for training and arming moderate Syrian rebels to battle Islamic State, a major part of his military campaign to "degrade and destroy" the militant group.

    The Senate voted 78-22, in a rare bipartisan show of support for one of Obama's high-profile initiatives. With the House of Representatives approving the legislation on Wednesday, the measure now goes to Obama to sign into law.

    Ten Senate Democrats and 12 Republicans voted no.

    Obama thanked Congress for the speed in which it acted to back the plan, which he announced on Sept. 10, and said the strong bipartisan support showed Americans were united in the fight against Islamic State.

    LINK TO REUTERS

    So, no.
    I don't like being called a liar. I would have thought that was beneath you.

    I did look it up.

    If you disagree with the report from Reuters, so be it. But it is a source of information that, for the moment, I find more reliable than your assertions to the contrary.

    Parent

    Maybe... (none / 0) (#73)
    by lentinel on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 12:13:13 PM EST
    but this is what I read...

    The U.S. Congress gave final approval on Thursday to President Barack Obama's plan for training and arming moderate Syrian rebels to battle Islamic State, a major part of his military campaign to "degrade and destroy" the militant group.

    The Senate voted 78-22, in a rare bipartisan show of support for one of Obama's high-profile initiatives. With the House of Representatives approving the legislation on Wednesday, the measure now goes to Obama to sign into law.

    Ten Senate Democrats and 12 Republicans voted no.

    Obama thanked Congress for the speed in which it acted to back the plan, which he announced on Sept. 10, and said the strong bipartisan support showed Americans were united in the fight against Islamic State.

    I have also read that this policy of arming the rebels had been forcefully advocated by Madame Clinton... after they had been "vetted" to weed out "extremists" in their midst.

    Yeah. That'll work...

    Parent

    Hey, hey! (none / 0) (#42)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 09:05:41 AM EST
    This is a left leaning Liberal site, so, only Liberals are permitted to use the term, "moron."


    It's ok (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:38:05 PM EST
    I am a left leaning liberal so I can do it.

    I am just sick of intolerant authoritarian progressive hypocrites alienating everybody from the democratic party.

    Parent

    Yeah, right, you're a left-leaning liberal. (5.00 / 3) (#149)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:22:30 PM EST
    And I'm the odds-on favorite to succeed Pope Francis at the Holy See.

    >:-|

    Parent

    How about schmendrick? (none / 0) (#82)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:27:22 PM EST
    would that be better?

    Parent
    YES!! (none / 0) (#84)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:35:11 PM EST
    Not only better...Fantastic!

    Parent
    People might demand links.. (none / 0) (#86)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:36:56 PM EST
    I DON'T CAVE IN TO DEMANDS, GOT IT? (none / 0) (#151)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:45:48 PM EST
    i'm sorry, i'm sorry,
    what did you want again?

    Parent
    That comment was deleted (none / 0) (#194)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 01:29:03 AM EST
    name calling is not allowed here. Calling someone a moron is not acceptable.

    Parent
    Okay, I have mixed feelings about this: (none / 0) (#75)
    by sj on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 12:22:05 PM EST
    Just a few references to assault rifles. Asks Congress to pass a bill preventing those on the no-fly list from buying them.
    Personally, I think there should be an outright ban.

    Having said that, the no-oversight, no-getting-off-it, no-explanation-of-why-or-if-you're-on-it, no-fly list ought not be determining factor.

    Seriously... (5.00 / 2) (#76)
    by kdog on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 12:55:15 PM EST
    Where's the due process before being placed on the no-fly/no-gun list?

    Of much greater concern to me than the illusion of personal safety is the safety of our civil rights.  The judicial branch can not always be counted on to reign in Congress and the Executive...case in point, the no-fly list still exists.

    Parent

    Of course even the definitions of civil rights (none / 0) (#89)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 01:43:29 PM EST
    are subject to interpretation these days..

    How else to explain things like the ACLU supporting the Citizens United decision?

    Parent

    Touche... (none / 0) (#146)
    by kdog on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:13:31 PM EST
    I was hoping due process could be pretty much settled, speech is widely interpreted and the ACLU likes their freedoms interpreted wide and far. I'm grateful for that, regardless of a devil is due moment or two.

    A simple hearing too much to ask before being placed on the do not fly, do not legally purchase firearms, do not even think about a visa, etc lists, oh benevolent leader(s)?

    Parent

    A lot of really bad things impacting civil rights (5.00 / 1) (#158)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:04:15 PM EST
    can result from electing the wrong people simply because they had more money, excuse me, more protected speech.

    I hate how 99% of lawyers make the other 1% look bad..

    Parent

    IMO It's Dumb... (none / 0) (#95)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 02:34:36 PM EST
    ...it would mean giving access to a list that up until now has been super duper secret.  

    Want to know if you are on it, try to buy a gun, $100 + tax will let anyone find out if the US government thinks they have close enough ties to terrorism to be dangerous.  Plus you get a free gun.

    The list is secret for a reason, and while I disagree with it, they aren't going to open it up for gun checks when any idiot can buy a gun without the going through those channels.

    Parent

    Why is that worse than finding out you are on it (5.00 / 2) (#118)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:41:02 PM EST
    when you try to fly?

    Parent
    I'm Sorry... (none / 0) (#134)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:34:28 PM EST
    ...I meant it is much easier and much more convent way to find out if you are on the list.

    At the airport, the best outcome is you don't fly, the worse is guys in dark suits wanting to chat or you are 5,000 miles from home will have to figure how to get home without using commercial travel.

    No way the Fed is going to have an easy way for people to see if they are on the list.

    Parent

    Just FYI, if you are an American citizen, (5.00 / 1) (#170)
    by Anne on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:43:24 PM EST
    out of the country, and denied boarding because you are on the list, you are still entitled to passage back to the US - in fact the US government is obligated to assist you in gaining approval to return:

    See here for much useful information.

    I sometimes wish that women's rights with respect to their own bodies was as vigilantly and vigorously defended as the right to bear arms.

    Parent

    That is Not True... (none / 0) (#203)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:19:00 AM EST
    ...I can't find the example, but it was posted here where a man from Portland flew to, I want to way UAE, and when he tried to return home, the UAE security took him and tortured him for months.

    He eventually ended up in Sweden with no way to get back to the US.  Found it, it's little more complicated, but basically the FBI uses the list to extort potential informants and if they refuse, bad things happen.

    He is not the only one
    to be coerced into becoming an informant using the no-fly list.

    Fikre's claims are not unique--indeed, they are remarkably similar to the accounts of other American Muslims who say they were detained and interrogated by foreign security forces at the behest of the US government. Fikre's story echoes those of Naji Hamdan, Amir Meshal, Sharif Mobley, Gulet Mohamed, and Yusuf and Yahya Wehelie. All are American Muslim men who claim that, while traveling abroad, they were detained, interrogated, and in some cases abused by local security forces; the US government, they say, used this process to circumvent their legal rights as American citizens.

    Several FBI officials have confirmed to me (on the condition that they not be named) that the bureau has for years used some of its elite international agents--known as legal attachés, or "legats"--to coordinate the detention of American and foreign terrorism suspects at the hands of American allies. And although the FBI maintains that foreign governments that detain American terrorism suspects are told not to abuse them, many of the countries in question have long histories of abusive detentions.

    LINK

    Parent

    Good point, at least the agents (none / 0) (#152)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:50:28 PM EST
    are right there at the airport when you realize they are on to you. Can't slip back under cover quite so easily.

    I agree that is a consideration, but I think blowing that cover is worthwhile since id the bad guy (or gal, but I will use the male pronouns)  is at the point of buying his weapons it may be close to when he is going to strike - what good is having him on a watch list if you are not going to stop him from taking the vital next steps to action?  I am assuming they are not actively shadowing everyone on the list.

    Parent

    I Agree... (none / 0) (#206)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 09:20:36 AM EST
    ...but I doubt the folks who created and maintain the list, do.  It's common sense and I was in no way arguing that people on the no fly list should not be banned from buying guns.  They should.

    Parent
    Same here, I have no problem with an outright ban (none / 0) (#120)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:46:00 PM EST
    To 2nd amendment absolutists I will concede that well regulated militias may have assault weapons.

    And PLEASE people spare me the definitions of what constitutes an assault weapon.

    I realize the no-fly list link is done for political purposes to find some kind of a least common denominator...apparently that is impossible on this issue, but nice try, Obama.

    Parent

    Trump "best memory in the world" (none / 0) (#106)
    by Chuck0 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:16:59 PM EST
    can't think of any Muslim athletes. His tweet after Obama's speech: "Obama said in his speech that Muslims are our sports heroes. What sport is he talking about, and who? Is Obama profiling?"

    Will this finally prove to his supporters that this guy is a moron?


    But but he's rich.. (5.00 / 2) (#109)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:22:12 PM EST
    and he talks really loud..

    That means the rest of the band grooms him and he gets to eat first.

    Parent

    Ever hear of... (5.00 / 2) (#111)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:31:59 PM EST
    ... Muhammad Ali, jesus christ man, speaking of morons.

    There are quite a few in American professional sports.

    Parent

    and Kareem Abdul Jabar (5.00 / 2) (#115)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:37:09 PM EST
    But Kareem didn't play for the Knicks (5.00 / 1) (#117)
    by shoephone on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:39:27 PM EST
    or the Nets. See?

    Really, I can name quite a few Muslim athletes, in basketball alone. Apparently, the gaping hole in Trump's famous memory is yuuuuge.

    Parent

    True, my bad (none / 0) (#119)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:41:58 PM EST
    The worlds does not exist beyond NY-NJ.

    Parent
    Power Memorial HS (none / 0) (#125)
    by jmacWA on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:03:09 PM EST
    But he played high school ball at Power Memorial (as Lew Alcindor).

    Parent
    I Think Most People Don't Care... (none / 0) (#131)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:15:48 PM EST
    ... enough to find out an athlete's religious preference.

    It's not like the announcers say, "The muslim hits a home run !!"

    Parent

    I'm sure twitter is lighting with examples (none / 0) (#116)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:39:08 PM EST
    I didn't need to chime in..but anyone that cannot come up with at least those 2 in a matter of seconds is willfully ignorant, aka Donald Trump

    Parent
    The Sad Part... (none / 0) (#129)
    by ScottW714 on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:08:23 PM EST
    ...I have no doubt Trump has seen Ali fight, probably met the guy a time or two.

    Google proves me right.

    Parent

    You want (none / 0) (#108)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:18:37 PM EST
    The short answer?

    Parent
    It is tribalism (none / 0) (#123)
    by MO Blue on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 03:52:32 PM EST
    His supporters are members same tribe, morons.

    Parent
    I think we settled on schmendricks (none / 0) (#132)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:26:38 PM EST
    as the more civil way of describing them..

    Plus, it forces them to look things up and to read.

    Nudnicks is another good one.

    Parent

    Always fond of meshugener (none / 0) (#133)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:32:39 PM EST
    Jews have a lot of words for the stupid.    Probably from centuries of dealing with them.

    Parent
    Meshugener (5.00 / 2) (#137)
    by shoephone on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 04:44:10 PM EST
    actually means "crazy," although in this case, "stupid" will certainly suffice.

    Parent
    Or shmegegge (none / 0) (#185)
    by Zorba on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 08:06:12 PM EST
    And there are a few other Yiddish terms I could use, but they would no doubt violate the site rules, and Jeralyn would be justified therefore in deleting my comment.   ;-)

    Parent
    Like, "mashugana?" (none / 0) (#191)
    by NYShooter on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 11:45:54 PM EST
    Why I love such Hebrew "curse" words:

    Yes, it's a slur, yes, it means, "crazy," and, yes, its a pejorative. But, somehow, the meaning is relayed, yet, it's done in such a benign, gentle way, like a soft chamois cloth, not harsh, irritable corduroy.

    Does that make sense?

    Parent

    How words sounds to us (none / 0) (#192)
    by jondee on Tue Dec 08, 2015 at 12:13:47 AM EST
    has a tremendous amount to do with our relationship to the speaker and their relationship to us..And each other's relationship to the language itself and all it's history and associations..

    Henry Miller grew up amidst the harsh bustle of Brooklyn and the old New York garment district and he used to say that yiddish he heard was a language in which God and rotten vegetables sounded the same and meant the same..


    Parent

    Trump has called (none / 0) (#154)
    by KeysDan on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 05:54:37 PM EST
    for a complete ban on Muslims coming into the country.  No tourists, no Americans who are Muslims trying to come home, no nothing.   Sounds like Trump now has a lock on the Republican nomination--save for Lindsey, not many will see a problem.  

    I read (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:03:25 PM EST
    where Cruz is now on top in Iowa. So...it's going to be a heck of a ride for the next two months. The game is going to be called I Can Top That Crazy With This Crazy.

    Parent
    Cruz=Carson (none / 0) (#160)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:05:01 PM EST
    He might have a bit more juice in other states but I still say VP

    Parent
    As long (none / 0) (#163)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:27:25 PM EST
    as Trump is in yeah. I see a path for him if Trump is no longer in the game. I just don't see how any of the others get the nomination. What state are any of the others going to win outside of their home state?

    Parent
    How far behind (5.00 / 3) (#157)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:03:41 PM EST
    Can internment camps be?

    Parent
    One does wonder (5.00 / 2) (#173)
    by Zorba on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:08:38 PM EST
    if he has ever even read the Constitution of the United States of America.
    Apparently not.  He's pandering to the worst instincts of the worst followers of the Republican Party.
    And there seem to be way too many of those worst followers.

    Parent
    Has MSNBC been following all of his speeches live? (none / 0) (#164)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:28:02 PM EST
    Thought it was safe to have the TV on in the background while I ate dinner...nearly choked running for the remote.

    Parent
    His rap on Hillary (none / 0) (#166)
    by ruffian on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:29:28 PM EST
    She is weak and has no stamina. Ha!

    Parent
    I saw (none / 0) (#168)
    by Ga6thDem on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 06:32:11 PM EST
    that and started laughing at Trump for saying it. He hit the mark with Jeb but that's not gonna work on Hillary the energizer bunny. I mean she even laughed at it and said check her schedule. He said she did one event and went home for days to sleep. LOL.

    Parent
    From one of the greatest democrat presidents (none / 0) (#175)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:12:26 PM EST
    "Now, of course, the refugee has got to be checked because, unfortunately, among the refugees there are some spies, as has been found in other countries. And not all of them are voluntary spies--it is rather a horrible story but in some of the other countries that refugees out of Germany have gone to, especially Jewish refugees, they found a number of definitely proven spies."

    Almost no Germans were allowed entry from 1941 until victory was achieved and the few that were underwent thorough vetting and a religion litmus test.

    Parent

    And what a proud (4.00 / 1) (#176)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:16:59 PM EST
    Chapter of our history that was.

    Parent
    Defeating savage fascists intent on (none / 0) (#177)
    by Redbrow on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:19:01 PM EST
    World domination?

    Hell ya it was!

    Parent

    Yeah (5.00 / 3) (#178)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:21:19 PM EST
    And turning away boatloads of desperate refugees who were sent to death camps.

    Hell yeah!

    Parent

    Officially putting my dollar down (none / 0) (#179)
    by CaptHowdy on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:25:16 PM EST
    That before the republican primary is over internment camps will be flirted with if not downright proposed.

    Parent
    And then there was that whole (none / 0) (#180)
    by jondee on Mon Dec 07, 2015 at 07:30:12 PM EST
    socialistic New Deal..

    Interfering just when nature and and the Free Market were winnowing out the unfit..

    Parent