c_and_a

Maybe he should go after the terrorists instead of the people who tried to make America safer.

Sorry, but if a terrorist is captured with a WMD, I want Jack Bauer to be there with a blowtorch,

not civilian lawyers with Miranda rights.

Exactly.

I have no problem with that if there are incredibly extenuating circumstances like you mentioned.

Obama, as he should have done, actually took the high ground here.

While the typically childish leaders of Latin America pissed and moaned about things that were happening 25-50 years ago like they always do, Obama said it was time to move on, which it is. The real question is, will the leaders of these Latin American governments, where corruption has been endemic for years and years, listen and actually attempt to get something done or will they just keep on complaining while we continue to absorb the portions of their population that are the biggest victims to their bullheaded policies.

We acted like the parent and they acted like the child in this situation. Obama made the United States look at lot better saying what he did than if he would have devolved to their crappy level.

Lesson #1: No matter how badly a parent abuses their child, the parent should never acknowledge their own poor behavior.

Lesson #2: The U.S. has done nothing bad in Latin America lately because Latin America amazingly has been in suspended animation for the past 25 years. Therefore, nothing bad could have happened.

Lesson #3: Latin Americans enjoy it when the U.S. government overthrows one of their democratically-elected governments and replaces it with a brutal dictatorship.

Lesson #4: "Banana Republics" have nothing to do with bananas. Just ask United Fruit Company.

Lesson #5: Latin Americans are always better off when they listen to our bullheaded policies.

Do you have any room left in your time machine?

The United States did plenty of screwy things in Latin America, but moaning about it 25 years later is not going to change or help the fact. Sure, you can sit on your hands and complain about it all you want, but it is never going to get you anywhere or get anything done. There are probably venues and arenas where it is even appropriate to do so, but not in a conference where you're supposed to be getting ####### done rather than reflecting on the past century of history. If you choose to complain, you'll just make yourself feel somewhat better while the majority of your people continue to toil in poverty. Just like the majority of African American elected officials.

I'm with you on that. What pi$es the sh!t out of me are the ones who wanted Obama fail before he's even had a chance to prove his policies will work. That to me isn't patriotic. It's just bitter defeat at best, and bordering on treachery.

Nothing wrong with dissent on either side, unless you're a Stalinist or something.

I'm done with politics. It ruins everybody career except for politicians.

No don't become cynical. That's the easy way out. These are complex problems this country is facing and we need meaningful debate, not rhetoric and fear mongering.

Please, if you're not cynical than you're not paying attention. If American politicians kept their promises and had the real interests of the people at heart, we'd be living in the closest thing you can to a utopia by now.

But it is just more self-serving #######, on both sides.

I'm curious why Dimcraps are so worried about the direction of the Republican party. Aren't they convinced yet they have the future all sewn up?

Know your enemy.

And I thought only right wingers were secessionists. One sentence can speak volumes.

These things are cyclical, just a few years ago people were debating the end of the Democratic Party. Again, politics are incredibly cyclical. Many independent conservatives such as myself are hopeful that the GOP will go down in flames and a real conservative, libertarian-type party will emerge, while Democrats and lefties think that they won't be facing opposition anymore.

Both are wrong. The GOP will be back, and we'll still have two relatively bad parties to choose from.

For all the recent talk about Texas, they've weathered this pretty well compared to the rest of the country. Cities like Dallas and Houston have done well compared to cities of similar sizes on the coasts.

I'd like to make it clear that I didn't vote for Obama and I'm not a Democrat; however, I like how Obama handled the situation. Getting in a huge argument wouldn't have solved a whole lot (if anything).

Same here. I call myself an "independent conservative" and I think this was definitely the right thing to do. In no one's wildest dreams would I vote for Obama, but I'll give credit where it is due here.

Obama, as he should have done, actually took the high ground here.

While the typically childish leaders of Latin America pissed and moaned about things that were happening 25-50 years ago like they always do, Obama said it was time to move on, which it is. The real question is, will the leaders of these Latin American governments, where corruption has been endemic for years and years, listen and actually attempt to get something done or will they just keep on complaining while we continue to absorb the portions of their population that are the biggest victims to their bullheaded policies.

We acted like the parent and they acted like the child in this situation. Obama made the United States look at lot better saying what he did than if he would have devolved to their crappy level.

I wouldn't mind if he killed them honestly.

IMO the only propaganda people believe is the propaganda they want to believe.

Yup.

Nice article.

All these things about people living in "tent cities" or whatever is sensationalist ####### to rile up people that are anti-immigration, or who have just never lived in a metropolitan area before.

There were tons of homeless people when the economy was "good," people. Most homeless are affected by the economy only in that the benefits they were receiving when the economy was in better shape. Are there people who have gotten totally screwed by this economic downturn, lost their homes and jobs, and have sense become homeless? Sure, there are some, but most of them probably were working in low-tier sales jobs that always get shed when the economy goes down, or really, really overstretched themselves and were spending too much, or a combination of both. Really in that case you're a victim of your own circumstances that you could have controlled.

With all the opportunities there are in the United States, an American shouldn't even have to compete for a job with someone from another country who can't even speak English and may not have finished high school. I have little sympathy for those Americans.

I love the way they run things in NH. I would move there in a heartbeat if my job didn't keep me where I was. It is good to see that there are some real freedom loving people left in this country.

These people that are calling for secession from that Union are not true patriots no matter what they claim to be. They're Republican partisan hacks. Both the Republican and the Democratic party have facilitated this phenomena of the federal government overstepping their bounds relative to the states.

There are many things that the federal government is good for, but the federal government is getting involved in minuscule things and imposing its will over things it should not be getting involved in. The federal government should be providing for all issues related to defense and trade. No question there. There are certain domestic human rights issues, like the right for gays to enjoy the same legal rights as everyone else and the right for blacks to be fully enfranchised that the federal government should intervene in. But really, there aren't a ton of other issues.

The federal government should not be holding states hostage for highway funding by making them enact nanny-state seatbelt laws. This is preposterous. States should be putting together their own welfare systems if that is what they wish to do. There are parts of the United States where people don't mind taxes and love the nanny-state idea, that is fine, the state governments can tax those people all they want. Otherwise, get out of my checkbook and get off my lawn.

MSNBC is just as biased as Fox News is. The difference is, Fox News still likes to think that they are presenting unbiased, and unfiltered news. Everyone hears what they want to.

Not only that but the commentating on MSNBC is based on facts, figures and logic, things that pose a severe problem for FAUX News and their viewers.

Exhibit A of what is wrong with both the news media and most America today.

MSNBC is based off of facts, figures, and logic my #######. The only news station based off of facts, figures, and logic is probably PBS. If you think that partisan drivel on either side can be equated with facts, you're crazy and dangerous.

Bullsh!t. It's about losing power to a Black man. Plain and Simple.

If it were solely about race, the Republican party would be even worse off than it is right now under Michael Steele.

Oh, that's right, there's only one kid of African American, the liberal one, and all conservative blacks are sell-outs.

Fukcing A Right

I am really proud of the states who have asserted their rights

Great Job..........

If they had any integrity they would have done it years ago.

If you're looking at it from a federal spending standpoint, this movement is just full of partisan hackery. Obama is the scapegoat for a government that has been overstretched and irresponsible for a long time.

Also even though states like Oklahoma are federal freeloaders there are innovative solutions that they could home up with that could balance their budget that they would not be able to pursue under the auspices of the federal government.

LOL, this has nothing to do with race, give that a rest.

Yeah, right, we're gonna have states declaring their independance because in 9 weeks, Obama hasn't completely undone all the injury that was sustained in the previous 8 (some say 16) years. This would only happen in Rush's wet dreams.

In the view of people who honestly believe in limited government and are not partisan hacks, this was a long time coming, and is certainly not limited to the Obama administration.

What takes away from the credibility of the teaparty folks is that they should have been protesting this type of thing a long time ago. Excessive taxation has been in force for a very long time in this country.

I agree in spirit with these teaparties, but I would not participate in one because they seem to be populated heavily by right wing partisan hacks rather than people who are really interested in genuine reform.

However Fox News and every other news network should have covered this, thousands and thousands of citizens all over the United States were protesting and that is not news? Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it isn't news, comrade. Oh, and MSNBC's coverage of the teaparties was ridiculous. There really is not honest media in this country.

Let's start from the beginning, my British Colonist friend. You and your ilk sailed across the world looking for more 'stuff.' And when you found a place, you didn't give a rats ####### about the natives. You just took and took and took. You colonized the world, leaving the natives in the sh!tter. Thank you.

So why didn't the "natives" fight back? Because the indigenous civilizations were primitive and

backwards. European civilization was superior in most respects to those in other parts of the world.

THAT, my friend, is the reason they are sucking wind today, just as they did centuries ago.

And the fact that many indigenous leaders cooperated with the colonists at the expense of their native populations, something that continues in a similar form today.

86/100

Yeah, it's great to live in a big city and not even have the need to own a car. And if I ever want to escape I'll just rent a zipcar for a couple of days.

I have actually heard of many cases where the income requirement is more subjective than you may intially think.

Sorry to hear about the bg check, unfortunately not the first time I have heard that either.

Reasons # 4934850 my kids will never go to public schools.

Do any of you who tend to take yourselves quite seriously ever think people just screw around when they're asked these survey questions? I do that quite frequently.

I am most certainly NOT Godless. I belong to a religion that is generally considered to be quite "anti-gay". While I may or may not (I am okay with gayness but that's beside the point for my argument) agree with gayness, that has nothing to do with my want for gay people to be allowed to marry. It shouldn't matter if you personally think that being gay is a sin or if you personally think that being gay is wrong. God gave us free will and part of that free will is choosing who we love or (possibly in your opinion) how we sin.

Our country is founded on a set of amendments that have been ordered in order of importance! The FIRST, meaning the most important, amendment in the United States constitution says that everyone is free to worship whomever they please! If this is the case, the United States government cannot impose laws on the people based on certain religious beliefs -like being gay is wrong.

If you want to be a good Christian then you can go ahead and try to "change" all the gays you want (if that is your opinion about the matter and it seems to be. Although I repeat, it is NOT mine!). But if they have the legal right to marry then so be it. That is their choice and at least they are getting all of the rights as outlined under the constitution.

But please, don't assume that just because some of us have minds open enough to read the constitution that we do not have God.

And I apologize if this argument has already been made. I didn't finish reading the thread after I read that and felt I just had to respond!

Are you willing to allow any number of people form a marriage also?

Where in the Constitution does it require a marriage to be only 2 people? In fact it is not and to follow your warped idea of "letting anyone do anything" would strike down so many laws.... as most are influenced by both history and the collective "Christian atmosphere" that was prevalent for most of this countries history.

So tell me should people be allowed to marry in unlimited numbers? Should people be allowed to have sex in public parks, should group-sex be also be taught in school as "an option".

Societies have a right and duty to "collectively" decide what is or is not acceptable in marriage as few other policies will effect the public as a whole, as the prevalent family structure.

If the majority of People WANT alternative type marriages, fine, lets vote on it and if it passes, let "all" people decide for themselves what their families will consist of.

Where your logic might crumble is if you want to say, "religion should have no bearing on the issue" but then suggested we should hang on to the religious tradition of only "TWO" people being in a marriage.

That would be a lifestyle choice!

Being gay isn't.

That's the best you can do?

I smell a hypocrite.

Actually, you just got owned, how does it feel?

All it takes is a sharp dose of the facts the expose the fearmongering blather that you're posting.