Republicans Whine That Release Of Bergdahl Makes Americans Unsafe
Rather than celebrate the release of an American prisoner of war, Republicans are using it as an excuse to claim President Obama is weak.
Top Republicans on the Senate and House armed services committees went so far as to accuse President Obama of having broken the law, which requires the administration to notify Congress before any transfers from Guantanamo are carried out.
“Trading five senior Taliban leaders from detention in Guantanamo Bay for Bergdahl’s release may have consequences for the rest of our forces and all Americans. Our terrorist adversaries now have a strong incentive to capture Americans. That incentive will put our forces in Afghanistan and around the world at even greater risk,” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Howard P. McKeon (R-Calif.) and the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, James M. Inhofe (Okla.), said in a joint statement.
But Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel says Congress was not told in advance of the impending release because Bergdahl’s life was in danger.
In his first extensive public comments about Saturday’s operation, Hagel said intelligence the US had gathered suggested that Bergdahl’s “safety and health were both in jeopardy, and in particular his health was deteriorating”.
Taliban members handed Bergdahl over to special operations forces in eastern Afghanistan, and later in the day the detainees were flown from Guantánamo to Qatar.
The Pentagon did not give Congress the required 30-day notice for the release of detainees, prompting criticism, which is also being levelled at the decision to negotiate with “terrorists”.
Hagel said it was the administration’s judgment that the military had to move quickly to get Bergdahl out, “essentially to save his life”.
He said it was the unanimous consensus of the National Security Council, and the president has the authority to order such a release under article 2 of the Constitution. Only a handful of people knew about the operation and Hagel said “we couldn’t afford any leaks anywhere, for obvious reasons”.
Linda1961 June 1st, 2014 at 11:23 am
Releasing a POW shows weakness and endangers American troops according to gopers, but waging war against a nation that was of no threat to us is a sign of strength. Oh, and inadequate funding of the VA doesn’t harm the troops, at least according to the gopers.
Let them try to use this as a “Willie Horton” moment, when President Obama isn’t running for office, and can never run for president again. They will just look as silly as when they shout “Benghazi!”
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 3:20 pm
These so called fiscal conservatives have yet to sacrifice a single dime to pay for any of their Wars and occupations of choice.
To this day.
Bob Waas June 5th, 2014 at 8:54 am
The VA had a surplus of $500 million dollars. More money is the liberals solution to every problem; when the real problem is accountability.
Look how money fixed Solyndra, education, and the big one, poverty. Oh yeah, look how we buy friendship in the middle east by sending billions of dollars to Muslim nations who use the money to buy weapons to kill us.
cecilia June 7th, 2014 at 8:30 pm
considering how incompetently the war in Iraq was handled by The cheney Cabal I wouldn’t brag about the gop doing a good job
and as a Do Nothing congress they continue to accomplish nothing
ihazconservative June 1st, 2014 at 11:28 am
Sorry, but I don’t see how they are wrong in this. Not negotiating with terrorists is a long-standing policy for the exact reasons that McKeon/Inhofe mentioned. Everything Obama does is not immediately worthy of defense (hello, NSA?), and this to me is one of those things where we ought to all agree it was a nonsensical move – anyone who is captured has their life at stake. That’s not something unique to this case. This was a stupid thing to do.
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 12:13 pm
Nor is everything the President does, worthy of immediate condemnation. It was not a stupid thing to do, it was the right thing to do.
As far as not negotiating with terrorists, even Israel recognizes that each situation is unique and should be evaluated based on relevant facts at the time
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/62276/peter-r-neumann/negotiating-with-terrorists
Even the government of Israel — which is not known to be soft on terrorism — has strayed from the supposed ban: in 1993, it secretly negotiated the Oslo accords even though the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) continued its terrorist campaign and refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist.
ihazconservative June 1st, 2014 at 2:05 pm
Why was it the right thing to do? Should we release dangerous prisoners every time one of our people gets captured and they demand it?
We aren’t talking about “negotiate” in terms of a peace process, we are talking about taking hostages and then swapping. And yes, there are no absolutes and there are special cases, but what about this case made this “the right thing to do” to let five senior Taliban commanders go?
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 2:48 pm
from a layman’s perspective, I see no logic in incarcerating individuals who cannot possibly threaten this nation without being on American soil, if the price of that incarceration is to allow an American soldier to rot in a foreign prison.
what possible impact will these five men have on our safety and security that is different from the other countless al Qaeda operatives who never left Afghanistan?
to me, that is the decision the President had to face. He decided that the threat from these men did not justify keeping Sgt. Bergdahl in prison. I agree with that decision.
They are now in the custody of the government of Qatar which has a strong incentive in making sure these individuals do not engage in further hostile activity against the United States.
We are Qatar’s single largest source of foreign investment dollars, including the heavy machinery required to process their oil and gas exports. As they say, money talks. The money that Qatar stands to lose if they fail to follow through on their agreement is a powerful incentive.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 2:53 pm
Very well thought out and rational response.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 3:18 pm
Why don’t you tell the Bergdahl family to there faces that you think their son should still be a hostage?
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 12:23 pm
and another example from a country that knows a thing or two about dealing with terrorism.
no we should definitely not all agree that the President’s decision was a nonsensical move. quite the contrary, anyone condemning the President’s decision needs to recognize that it is despicable to advocate letting Americans rot and die in a foreign prison when options are available to bring them home.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/world/middleeast/30mideast.html?_r=0
Published: June 30, 2008
JERUSALEM — Israel’s government voted Sunday to trade one of the most notorious convicts in its prisons, a Lebanese murderer, for the bodies of two Israeli soldiers whose cross-border capture led to and partly motivated its monthlong war with the Lebanese militiaHezbollah in summer 2006.
ihazconservative June 1st, 2014 at 2:06 pm
There are always special circumstances for particular cases, as the one you went back six years to find shows. What made this a special circumstance?
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 2:30 pm
Interesting how you are confirming the original point in my prior post when I said
“”even Israel recognizes that each situation is unique and should be evaluated based on relevant facts at the time””
Yes, there are always special circumstances and we rely on our elected leadership to make decisions about those circumstances, regardless of whether or not you personally voted for or support the person making the final decision.
. American combat operations will cease this year. Sgt. Bergdahl was the only American POW in Afghanistan and our best intelligence indicated he was in declining health. Demonstrating that “no one gets left behind” is more than just a catchy slogan, is a special enough circumstance for me. .
ihazconservative June 1st, 2014 at 2:56 pm
Yes, I confirmed your point, and it didn’t conflict with mine. But willing to swap out hostages is a good way to get more hostages taken – or do you think that’s a dumb idea for which there is no support or evidence? So a special circumstance needs to be special, or we show it works to hold us hostage. So perhaps I should walk back my point about it being stupid: But at the very least, they haven’t done a good job of explaining to us the necessity of ignoring this long-standing policy in this situation.
Combat operations may cease, but we are keeping thousands of troops there for at least the next two years, so ‘left behind’ isn’t really an apt description right now.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/05/27/316320567/obama-plans-to-leave-residual-force-of-9-800-in-Afghanistan
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 3:16 pm
Not in my name are any Americans being kept there.
One of the many liberal disagreements with Obama policy.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 2:47 pm
If it were up to you Bergdahl would still be a hostage.
God Bless President Obama.
ihazconservative June 1st, 2014 at 2:57 pm
Grow up.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 3:14 pm
I’m a grown man.
My assertion stands.
If it were up to you Bergdahl would still be a hostage.
Let’s debate it.
I challenge you to refute my assertion for all to see.
fahvel June 1st, 2014 at 12:29 pm
the only thing stupid here is your moronic comment.
ihazconservative June 1st, 2014 at 2:00 pm
Brilliant rejoinder, you really must have been a champ of a debater in school.
Gene Gaudette June 1st, 2014 at 11:56 am
Hagel and the White House had an equally compelling reason for keeping Congress in the dark: there is no doubt that certain GOP members would have leaked information (and probably gotten Bergdahl killed) because they will do anything to sabotage the Obama White House. Congressional Republicans cannot be trusted, period.
Bob Smetters June 1st, 2014 at 12:03 pm
I sense another scandal brewing over Obamas greediness. Republicans released hundreds of terrorists from Gitmo and other camps and you didn’t see them demanding anything for it, did you?
fahvel June 1st, 2014 at 12:28 pm
might be right. Can’t you just see those five guys taking on whatever troops are left (10,000?). They would slaughter the american forces down to the last breathing trooper.
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 1:17 pm
Here is the signing statement issued by President Obama when he signed the appropriations bill which included the 30 day notification period. For reference, George W Bush issued over 100 signing statements, justifying his actions in terms of the President’s Constitutional authority. A reference to the Bush administration’s justification is also included below.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/12/26/statement-president-hr-3304
In the event that the restrictions on the transfer of Guantanamo detainees in sections 1034 and 1035 operate in a manner that violates constitutional separation of powers principles, my Administration will implement them in a manner that avoids the constitutional conflict.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/23/AR2006072300511.html
“Presidents have issued signing statements since the early days of our country,” White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said yesterday. “President Bush’s signing statements are consistent with prior administrations’ signing statements. He is exercising a legitimate power in a legitimate way.”
Bush has vetoed only one bill since taking office, a bill approved by Congress last week relaxing his limits on federal funding for human embryonic stem cell research. But he has on many occasions signed bills, then issued statements reserving the right not to enforce or execute parts of the new laws, on the grounds that they infringe on presidential authority or violate other constitutional provisions.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 2:45 pm
Bush is no longer POTUS.. Barack Hussein Obama will be the FIRST POTUS, in which nothing he has done or not done, is his fault. Utterly amazing.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 3:06 pm
What is utterly amazing is the so called conservatives in this country that can’t get over their anger and hatred that stems from their inability to win a national election.
Face it.
You’re a flat out irrational partisan,angry hater.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 4:16 pm
Lemme guess, you are not partisan… 🙂
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 3:26 pm
since I never said anything about President Obama not being responsible for the signing statements he issues, I have no idea what you are talking about.
what is utterly amazing is how you folks on the right conjure up BS out of thin air and treat that BS as a fact.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 1:22 pm
The decision is a catch-22 but the concern is quite real, quit being starry eyed liberals and think for yourselves. Israel learned this lesson a long time ago after negotiating with hijackers, it meant more hijacking.
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 1:44 pm
why don’t you quit being a misinformed conservative and think for yourself.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/30/world/middleeast/30mideast.html?_r=0
http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/62276/peter-r-neumann/negotiating-with-terrorists
Even the government of Israel — which is not known to be soft on terrorism — has strayed from the supposed ban: in 1993, it secretly negotiated the Oslo accords even though the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) continued its terrorist campaign and refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 1:58 pm
I do think for myself, you appear to be toeing the liberal line and getting pissed because others freely choose to think different from you comrade. If you could see past your liberal “rage” I said it was a catch-22 and it is.. Only time will tell if the loony tunes over there attempt to abduct more servicemen over there.
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 2:20 pm
can’t control, nor do I want to control how things “appear” to you. your misconceptions are your problem.
the point is that if you are going to talk trash about being “starry eyed” and thinking for oneself, be prepared to have that trash talk happily returned.
if you don’t like taking it then stop dishing it out. your choice.
in any case, you made an unsubstantiated claim about Israel. I posted a reference with facts which contradicts your claim. that is thinking for oneself instead of blindly believing what someone posts in an internet forum.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 2:42 pm
Ok I stand corrected, however that does not change the fact that we (that includes you) will have to wait and see if the taliban decide to do an encore to free more of their buddies from gitmo. If they do, be prepared to explain it away since you appear to think it cannot happen.
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 2:57 pm
I am not at all saying that it cannot happen again. I am saying that it was the right decision in this instance. I am not sure what you mean by an “encore”. Being taken as a POW is an inherent risk for any soldier or sailor in a combat theatre. With the troop pullout coming over the next two years, that possibility will be greatly reduced but obviously still present.
But regardless of whether or not the exchange occurred, I highly doubt that it affects whether or not al Qaeda will take prisoners if they have an opportunity to do so.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 4:20 pm
Notice how it took five of them for one of us, count on them trying again, maybe next time it will be 10 for one..
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 4:28 pm
if one believes that if this exchange had never happened, al Qaeda would never again take any of our soldiers as prisoners of war, your argument would make sense.
I do not believe that. Consequently I see not merit in your argument. I think it is safe to assume that regardless of what happened with the prisoners at Guantanomo or any other facility, if al Qaeda has an opportunity to take prisoners, they will do so.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 4:40 pm
First, apparently the brain trust here thinks I am not rejoicing in the families reunification with their son, thats the furthest thing from the truth.. However these is always the other side of the coin to consider, we shall see if this openned pandoras box or kept the status quo.
craig7120 June 1st, 2014 at 5:00 pm
Us & them ?
Ok, how many of “them” have we killed?
How many of “us” have they killed?
You’re worried if they got the better of the deal in a hostage exchange? How old are you? Sheeesh!
Maybe Mr Obama should of exchanged weapons for the soldier, then you would of been all “starry eyed” like when Reagan did it with his buddies the iranians. You sure reinforce the reputation that gop supporters have of not being the sharpest knife in the drawer.
Watch folks, dude will deny his love of everything Reagan when confronted with the negotiating with terrorist part.
Notice when a republican is in the white house, the gop supporters wave their little flags and use the word patriotism in every sentence. The second a democrat is in, they hate taxes, they hate the government, they hate soldiers if returned home under circumstance beyond their control, they hate clean water, they hate clean air, they just hate.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 5:05 pm
Your strawman is all wet.. Save your outrage for the choir you sing to, you are projecting too much of your rage on me.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 5:32 pm
He does have some true and observable points you would fail at disputing one iota.
Why did you dismiss them as strawmen when he didn’t have a question to answer from you?
craig7120 June 1st, 2014 at 6:29 pm
You mean I don’t get to generalize my thoughts about republicans? Singing to the choir is what Rush and Beck do all day, everyday for the republican entertainment industry.
Outrage is a good description when I see a republican critcize the sitting POTUS for negotiating the safe return of a soldier after being held hostage.
Btw, don’t you have to lock and load and sling your ak47 to a duncan doughnuts today?
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 6:54 pm
I wasnt criticising the POTUS.. See how quickly you all jump to conclusions?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 2:58 pm
Wait and see.
Why can’t you revel in the joy of the Bergdahl family on this?
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 4:17 pm
I do not deny that, nor have I ever, again you all forgot to read where I said catch-22. The theme of my point is that there very well might be risks or future ramifications..
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 4:42 pm
What makes you think I have not been??? What is wrong with voicing a little caution? I am so sorry that I have the “wrong” opinions from the rest of the herd.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 5:27 pm
“What makes you think I have not been???”
Thats easy.
Because you have exhibited zero evidence of any joyous feelings for the family whatsoever.
“What is wrong with voicing a little caution?”
What did you so called conservatives call us millions of folks all over the world when we were voicing the same caution in the run up to and after the fact of two Wars and occupations that still haven’t been funded and are now incurring 200 billion in interest and rising to each yearly deficit?
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 5:36 pm
Why dont you stop blaming me for all the stuff you find wrong with conservatives and I will stop blaming you or everything I find wrong with liberals.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 5:47 pm
You didn’t call us anti-American traitors and accuse us of not supporting the troops?
Honestly?
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 6:05 pm
It is only a matter of time before I would have gotten accused of saying that even if I didnt.. Its amazing how I was accused of being partisan, by those who cannot see their own partisanship, its funny you know.. 🙂
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 6:16 pm
I’m a partisan.
But I’m on the right side of history when it comes to two still unfunded Wars and occupations of choice.
Did you really never accuse us as Anti-American troop haters?
Be honest.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 7:08 pm
Good for you… Yes I made no accusation about you or anyone else on the left of center.. But since you made your boast, I am checking you for consistency. First off most on both sides of center have no problem with the afghanistan war as it pertains to a response to 911. Iraq is the problem, I had a problem with it, no doubt you did to.. But you know what, you can stomp your feet all you want, it is what it is. Bitching about it ad naseum is about as effective as bitching about Vietnam ad naseum.. Remember LBJ sent in the Calvary based on a lie too, remember the Gulf Of Tonkin resolution? As for Iraq, the Intelligence services of the UK also supported the reason, alot of Democrats voted to authorize Iraq, including Lady Hillary. So lets not lose perspective here, we cant change the past, only learn from it, meanwhile you cannot hold me responsible for all you dislike about conservatives or BUSH or anything else REPUB or otherwise.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 8:04 pm
“First off most on both sides of center have no problem with the afghanistan war”
Nonsense.
No one on the left every imagined an unfunded 10 year invasion and occupation.
” As for Iraq, the Intelligence services of the UK also supported the reason,”
Nonsense.
Everyone was being sold a bill of goods.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/invasion-of-iraq-the-secret-downing-street-memo-intelligence-and-facts-were-fixed/5327841
” Remember LBJ sent in the Calvary based on a lie too, remember the Gulf Of Tonkin resolution?”
Your logical fallacy is…
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause
“meanwhile you cannot hold me responsible for all you dislike about conservatives or BUSH or anything else REPUB or otherwise.”
I will not and did not hold you responsible for anything except voting for and still supporting the GOP.
I just want you to be honest.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 8:14 pm
So I should vote Democrat so I can be beholden to the govt??
However you assume that I vote GOP because I oppose the DEMS? LOL
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 8:53 pm
Aren’t you going to even try to counter my refutations of your assertions?
“So I should vote Democrat so I can be beholden to the govt??”
You get a Two fer on that one.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/false-cause
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/tu-quoque
Democrats know that We the People ARE the Government and do our best to elect people that will work to make our Govt. preform better.
It is a work in progress and we suffer no delusions about it.
.
On the other hand the GOP/Teaparty seem to hate our Government.
We are the Government.
Why would a sane person elect someone who hates the institution?
To a rational American that never will make sense.
You don’t vote GOP?
Yes I am guilty of that assumption.
Based on your arguments and an educated guess.
Will you get mad if I say I don’t believe you?
I won’t call you a liar because I can’t prove anything.
I just want you to be honest.
Now try to continue without the silly logical fallacies and I will do the same.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 9:08 pm
Nothing wrong with wanting smaller and less i intrusive govt. Nothing wrong with wanting spending reduced. I will vote for anyone willing to achieve that, conservative democrats do exist. You shouldnt stereotype people because they dont think like you, stereotyping is against what I thought was a liberal credo. Just like liberals are supposed to be compassionate and tolerant, but its evident that they are only to those that think like they do.. This assuming thing goes both ways..
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 9:26 pm
“Nothing wrong with wanting smaller and less i intrusive govt”
Smaller?
in what way?
Less intrusive for whom?
Be specific.
“Nothing wrong with wanting spending reduced”
What spending?
Be specific.
I’m a policy wonk.
I can debate you for days.
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 9:37 pm
I see precious little evidence that conservatives in general want smaller less intrusive government. I do see that social programs are opposed on those grounds. But what about the trillions we spend on defense and the military? I never hear foreign policy debated in terms of the hard dollar cost to the American people and what that cost vs benefit actually will be.
Conservatives are the people who advocate amending the US Constitution to enable the criminalizing of flag burning and to prevent gay people from getting married.
Libertarians are the only group on the political right which actually lives up to their professed beliefs. From foreign policy to gay people to the drug war, they are entirely consistent. I disagree with them most of the time, but certainly respect their intellectual honesty.
On the other hand, the conservatives who identify with the GOP and the TeaParty are an entirely different kettle of fish altogether. They rail against “socialism” while at the same time they worship at the altar of Sarah Palin who as governor boasted about the Alaska Oil Income Royalty program which guarantees an annual check to every man, woman and child in the state, regardless of financial need.
The only eligibility requirement is to draw breath on Alaskan soil for the preceeding 12 months. I happen to think the Alaska program is a fantastic idea. But one can imagine if a liberal politician came up with a suggestion that we tax oil companies and use the proceeds to send a check to every child and adult citizen whether they need it or not.
Nothing wrong with being a conservative, but there is plenty wrong with the hypocrisy that says a government program is socialism when implemented by someone they did not vote for, but perfectly acceptable American capitalism when the same idea is implemented by someone they did vote for.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 11:18 pm
My
Top 10 Reasons to Vote Democrat:
#10.
I vote Democrat because I love the fact that I can now marry whatever I want. I’ve decided to marry my German Shepherd.
#9.
I vote Democrat because I believe oil companies’ profits of 4% on a gallon of gas are obscene, but the government taxing the same gallon at 15% isn’t.
#8.
I vote Democrat because I believe the government will do a better job of spending the money I earn than I would.
#7.
I vote Democrat because Freedom of Speech is fine as long as nobody is offended by it.
#6.
I vote Democrat because I’m way too irresponsible to own a gun, and I know that my local police are all I need to protect me from murderers and thieves. I am also thankful that we have a 911 service that get police to your home in order to identify your body after a home invasion.
#5.
I vote Democrat because I’m not concerned about millions of babies being aborted so long as we keep all death row inmates alive and comfy.
#4.
I vote Democrat because I think illegal aliens have a right to free health care, education, and Social Security benefits, and we should take away Social Security from those who paid into it.
#3.
I vote Democrat because I believe that businesses should not be allowed to make profits for themselves. They need to break even and give the rest away to the overnment for redistribution as the Democrat Party sees fit.
#2.
I vote Democrat because I believe liberal judges need to rewrite the Constitution every few days to suit fringe kooks who would never get their agendas past the voters.
…And
the #1 reason I vote Democrat is because I think it’s better to pay $billions$ or oil to people who hate us, but not drill our own because it might upset some endangered beetle, gopher or fish here in America. We don’t care about the beetles, gophers or fish in those other countries. –
See more at:
http://www.libertynewsonline.com/article_301_34702.php#sthash.U58azWTh.dpuf
foxnewslieseveryday June 2nd, 2014 at 12:25 am
let’s debate those one at a time.
Intellectually honest posters never use Gish Gallops.
Pick one at a time.
Go.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 2:36 pm
Address the links provided to you.
Or leave with your tail between your legs.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 2:43 pm
I will neither address them, nor shall I leave.. You can choose to ball your fists and scream now..
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 2:55 pm
Not willing to look at the links and discuss them?
Why are you here?
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 4:25 pm
I could ask the same of you, but I am fairly sure you enjoy singing to the choir.. 🙂 I dont. (Therein lies your answer)
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 5:37 pm
Are you here for a rational discussion or not?
mea_mark June 1st, 2014 at 3:09 pm
You don’t have to address the links if you don’t want to. It is a free country and if you want to live in ignorance you are free to do so. Just be aware that this is a private site and you are allowed to be here because we allow you to be here. How long that lasts remains to be seen.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 4:24 pm
Uh mea or is it mark, On the internet, one can cull together one article or another to further an agenda, for instance if you wanted to prove that the easter bunny is real, you could.. That is why I dont pay much attention in discussions when I encounter a slew of links in ones reply. ever hear of “I read it on the internet so it must be true” ?
arc99 June 1st, 2014 at 4:38 pm
the links I posted were two very straightforward references which refute your contention that Israel did not negotiate with terrorists. Your claim is false as demonstrated by the facts presented in those two articles.
I did not “cull together” anything.
If you have information to demonstrate that those articles are wrong on the facts, and that your claim about Israel is correct, then please post it.
Ross Cassell June 1st, 2014 at 4:47 pm
Look, early on in Israels **EXISTENCE** there was an airplane hijacking, they negotiated…. It gave positive reinforcement to terrorists that they could do more hijackings and the ilk.. What part of this did or do you not comprehend, go back and read what I wrote instead of injuring the tops of your knees on the underside of your desk.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 5:36 pm
How many hijackings since “they negotiated”?
I will read your cites and links.
ihazconservative June 1st, 2014 at 2:09 pm
You can make your point (and I’m making a similar one as you) without insulting the people you are trying to sway.
Foundryman June 1st, 2014 at 1:49 pm
If we needed anymore proof that republicans hate veterans, this is it. They wouldn’t even lift a finger to bring a POW home, even as the war is winding down. I hope they didn’t torture and waterboard him while he was there but I bet the republicans could care less if they did.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 2:01 pm
It hardly sounds like hate for veterans. They expressed concern because those who they are dealing with are not known for their integrity and will probably capture more Americans in the very near future. Time will tell, but I hope I’m wrong.
By the way, waterboarding is old fashion, we just kill them with drones; it saves time and money and I like it that way much better.
Foundryman June 1st, 2014 at 2:12 pm
Not doing or even supporting everything possible to get our POW home shows a deliberate lack of compassion, if I want to consider that hate, it’s my prerogative.
Waterboarding may be old fashioned to us maybe, but not to them, they will still follow Bush’s lead on torture.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 2:40 pm
So if I consider it hate by Obama toward the vets using the VA who are dying, you will agree with me?
No one ever died by waterboarding; nor did they suffer long term physical injuries, so it doesn’t justify as torture to me. John McCain was tortured and has the injuries to prove it. Daniel Pearl was tortured. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was given a long overdue bath and is still alive.
Foundryman June 1st, 2014 at 2:56 pm
What is Obama doing to the vets using the VA, besides trying to correct a problem that has existed long before Obama? It is hate towards vets by voting against any and ALL increases to veteran benefits including the VA at a time when two wars created a much larger number than capacity could handle. That shows a complete lack of concern. That vote was unanimous by 41 republican senators, not Obama.
No one ever died from waterboarding, but we are all still waiting on Hannity or any conservative to try it and prove it’s not torture to think you are dying.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 3:10 pm
You won’t get a rational response from the phony Christian.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 6:01 pm
What is a phony Christian? Do you mean people like Pelosi, Reid, Biden, Obama, et.al. who claim to be Christian but do not see the sin of abortion and homosexuality?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 6:05 pm
You’re a phony.
And you aren’t a real Conservative.
I’m more conservative than you and i can prove it in a debate.
But you’ll run from that challenge.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 7:51 pm
You’re a conservative? I would love to discuss it with you. I’ve taken those online tests and I scored 86% to the right. My wife took the test and she fell as far right as she could go.
Take the test and we can compare answers. http://www.gotoquiz.com/conservative_or_liberal
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 8:28 pm
Those test questions are silly and reek of push polling.
No thanks.
I’m a ConPro with a slight libertarian bent.
Let’s just ask each other a couple questions.
Is it any way “Conservative” to allow trans national corporations that have zero loyalty to America, have access to America’s resources and be allowed to Socialize the externalities of their industries onto the populace and the environment and sell our resources back to us at rigged (speculated on wall street) world market prices?
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 9:12 pm
The test wasn’t silly. It is 12 questions long and focused on social issues. As for your question, how about giving me an example. I tend to stop reading as soon as I reach the word socialize.
Let me ask you a question: What is your position on fiscal responsibility?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 9:36 pm
Social issues aren’t my big interest.
Governing and economic policies are.
You aren’t a fiscally responsible conservative either.
I say their should be a sacrifice to fund your Wars of choice.
To this day you haven’t been asked to sacrifice a dime to pay for any of it.
My kids are pissed.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 10:33 pm
Social issues are a one of the things that defines whether you are liberal or conservative.
Exactly how do conclude whether I am a fiscal conservative or not?
I don’t have a war of choice.
I sacrificed during WWII when my mom and her sisters took us kids to glean the farmers fields so we could get some produce. We sacrificed by suffering through the rationing of food and gasoline. I also sacrificed by not having my dad around because he was overseas fighting in the war. I further sacrificed because my uncle was killed in Okinawa.
My kids are more ticked by Obama mortgaging their future by adding 7+ trillion dollars to the national debt. I guess that doesn’t bother your kids because they are just mad at me because I haven’t been asked to sacrifice a dime to pay for my wars of choice.
You said you wanted to debate your claim of being a conservative, but you don’t want to take a simple test, or answer my previous post.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bob Waas Sr. foxnewslieseveryday • an hour ago
The test wasn’t silly. It is 12 questions long and focused on social issues. As for your question, how about giving me an example. I tend to stop reading as soon as I reach the word socialize.
Let me ask you a question: What is your position on fiscal responsibility?
foxnewslieseveryday June 2nd, 2014 at 12:18 am
“I don’t have a war of choice.”
LMAO!
You cheerled two unfunded wars of choice for years.
I have read LL since it’s inception.
And you called us that apposed those invasions and occupations Anti-American and troops haters.
Who do you think you’re kidding?
” Obama mortgaging their future by adding 7+ trillion dollars to the national debt.”
Nonsense.
I’ve seen Obewon destroy that canard for years on this site with sources that you totally ignore each and every time.
Again.
Who do you think you’re kidding?
I could give a flip about your family in the 40’s and 50’s and your anecdotal story about how much you “Sacrificed” so cut that logical fallacy right now.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/anecdotal
You’re no fiscal conservative.
Real fiscal conservatives actually pay their bills.
Bob Waas Sr. June 2nd, 2014 at 11:22 am
You’re pathetically maligned and no longer worth the time to debate. And, no I’m not running from a fight, I just like to debate issues with people who do so with integrity and honesty, which are two traits you have demonstrated thus far.
You may want to direct your energy debating with Obewon since the stats he posts are rarely accurate and lean more towards your far left leanings. Have a good life.
foxnewslieseveryday June 2nd, 2014 at 12:14 pm
” I just like to debate issues with people who do so with integrity and
honesty, which are two traits you have demonstrated thus far.”
TYVM for noticing and congratulations for posting your first honest sentence since I engaged you.
foxnewslieseveryday June 2nd, 2014 at 12:16 pm
“the stats he posts are rarely accurate”
[citations needed and will not be forthcoming]
Bob Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaas is a whiner
William June 3rd, 2014 at 9:24 am
You’re pathetically maligned and no longer worth the time to debate
Translation.
http://youtu.be/7FPELc1wEvk
foxnewslieseveryday June 2nd, 2014 at 12:15 am
” I tend to stop reading as soon as I reach the word socialize.”
Your logical Fallacy is……
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/personal-incredulity
Sko Hayes June 1st, 2014 at 6:51 pm
There are several instances of abortion in the bible. None of those are condemnation of the practice.
Try again.
Jesus never mentioned homosexuality, but he did talk about adulterers a lot. Christians should be more concerned about their own state of marriage. How many Christians are adulterers? 50%?
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 7:42 pm
Where in the bible does it say that God approved abortion? Please provide the chapter and verse. Abortion is not specifically mentioned, but the killing of innocents are.
Exodus
20:13 “You shall not murder.
Exodus 23:7 “Keep far from a false charge, and do not kill the innocent and righteous, for I will not acquit the wicked.”
Jesus delivered a message of salvation to sinners who repented, including homosexuals and adulterers. God delivered “the shalt not message” through His inspired word written by mortal men like Paul.
There are plenty of examples in the bible regarding homosexuality as a sin. http://carm.org/bible-homosexuality
Sko Hayes June 1st, 2014 at 7:45 pm
I didn’t say the bible said God approved abortion, did I, Bob?
What’s the point of having a debate with you if you can’t even reiterate my points cogently?
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 9:50 pm
You wrote: “There are several instances of abortion in the bible. None of those are condemnation of the practice.”
You stated instances of abortion in the bible, but present no proof and you said none was condemnation. What God doesn’t approve He condemns. Was that cogently enough for you?
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 5:58 pm
Obama was informed about the VA issues via the transition team before he took office. His solution was to throw more money at it. Money isn’t the problem, it is lack of proper management.
With an almost half billion dollar surplus do you still want to contend that money was a problem? The VA budget has nearly double since 2005.
Which would you prefer? 1. being given the chance to provide information through a friendly conversation and when you refuse, getting waterboarded? or, 2. getting yourself and your family and everyone around you blown to bits by a drone strike; without the benefit of due process.
Which one is it? 1 or 2 No other options.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 6:08 pm
Real Christians don’t advocate torture.
You’re no Christian.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 7:05 pm
Who said I advocated torture? I just asked you which one you would prefer, being waterboarded or killed outright. I don’t consider any treatment that doesn’t cause pain or physical damage as torture.
Can I be Christian if I advocate drone attacks?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 7:50 pm
Ask your Lord and Master.
Then come and tell me the answer.
I’ll wait.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 9:30 pm
He said you’re dishonest and indecisive.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 9:41 pm
Bearing False Witness……….Again.
You certainly don’t Walk the Walk, do ya?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 3:02 pm
Don’t you dare call yourself a Christian.
You Bear False Witness as easily as you breathe
Sko Hayes June 1st, 2014 at 6:43 pm
Wait a minute- John McCain was tortured, including waterboarding, and you admit that he has life long injuries from that torture, yet no one ELSE ever suffered long term physical injuries from torture?
Are you serious with this?
William June 1st, 2014 at 8:35 pm
John McCain was tortured, including waterboarding, …..and….
http://youtu.be/fvjn5cKQHQg
So the real POW John McCain says it was torture, but the chickenhawk Bob Waas and his non veteran right wing blow hard media clowns says it ISN’T torture.
Got it.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 8:58 pm
Try to keep up. John is not suffering from waterboarding; actually there is no evidence he ever was. His hands were bound behind his back. Then his captors pulled his arms backward and upward. It injured him to the extent that he still cannot raise his arms above his shoulders, without experiencing extreme pain.
I’m not one who believes in torture so I think we are just disagreeing on what constitutes torture. Waterboarding is not causing any physical pain, it’s merely elevating the victim’s level of fear, nothing more. The victim simply FEELS like they might drown. There are doctors there to oversee the process to ensure safety.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 9:00 pm
“There are doctors there to oversee the process to ensure safety.”
Baseless assertion.
Justin Volke V June 1st, 2014 at 6:21 pm
I would much rather have seen us rescue him and kill five if his captors in the process. That would be a fair trade.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 1:53 pm
It was a good trade. Now when they reenter the terrorist training camps we can blow them away with a drone attack. 🙂 As long as they were in Gitmo we had to treat them nice; but that all changed now.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 2:34 pm
But yet so called conservatives would rather have Bergdahl held in captivity than have to admit an Obama administration positive.
Why do you still support these right wing traitors?
Obewon June 1st, 2014 at 5:38 pm
GOP think their new BenGhazi is spelled BerGdahl!
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 5:51 pm
I never got an answer from Mr. Waas Sr.
Funny that. 😉
Justin Volke V June 1st, 2014 at 6:19 pm
When these murderers kill tens or hundreds of our soldiers after being released you will still say it was a good trade to rescue a us deserter?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 6:39 pm
Your logical fallacy Is…….
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/loaded-question
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 6:52 pm
The issue was whether trading prisoners would create more prisoners in the future, not who loves or hates the America military. You logical fallacy is…
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 7:32 pm
But yet so called conservatives would rather have Bergdahl held in
captivity than have to admit an Obama administration positive.
You support these so called conservatives.
You’re no conservative.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 8:58 pm
“The issue was whether trading prisoners would create more prisoners in the future, not who loves or hates the America military.”
You and some other so called conservatives made that the issue.
Your logical fallacy is…
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope
cecilia June 7th, 2014 at 7:57 pm
do you know how to NOT have prisoners in the future?
don’t start stupid wars for profits and put American citizens in danger
Bob Waas June 8th, 2014 at 4:29 pm
“don’t start stupid wars for profits” Really, tell it to the people who attacked us on 9/11 and December 7, 1941.
If you’re one of the kool ade drinkers who bought the line that Iraq was a war for oil, please show some proof (quoting Obewon’s stats is not proof). If it was a war for oil, where is the oil?
Are you referring to all wars, or only wars started when a Republican was president?
cecilia June 8th, 2014 at 8:50 pm
the people that sent planes into buildings on 9-11 did NOT come from Iraq.
and why haven’t you heard of the Project for the New American Century?
The goal was regime change in Iraq. Go look it up.
Even though no one with a brain believed that ‘the oil will pay for the war’ bullshit, that was certainly spouted by the cheney regime. And other amusing statements from rummy like: “It is unknowable how long that conflict [the war in Iraq] will last. It
could last six days, six weeks. I doubt six months.” – Feb. 2003
and, yes, all wars are stupid
Bob Waas June 8th, 2014 at 11:14 pm
You seem to have anger issues. You said all wars are stupid, and I have to agree with you. However, what do you suggest we do if we have another 9/11 or Dec 41 attack?
As for Iraq, it was never about retaliation for 9/11, it was preemptive when Saddam was sabre rattling. I, like most people wish we never went there, but we did, so whining about it now doesn’t fix anything; we should learn from it. There were enough leaders calling for Saddam’s head way before Bush took office.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iSwSDvgw5Uc
cecilia June 9th, 2014 at 9:56 am
Iraq was a complete waste of resources.
Not to mention useless deaths.
So not only did it severely reduce and nearly kill the Middle Class in America it certainly killed lots of Iraqis.
I think there’s all good reasons to be unhappy about the situation.
And if you want to know how to stop making wars here’s a solution which I’m sure you just won’t understand at all:
education. ESPECIALLY educating women.
I realize that doesn’t sound very sexy and certainly won’t satisfy those macho gun-loving types but is the most effective long term solution possible.
Bob Waas June 9th, 2014 at 4:47 pm
I agree education is a good thing. How do you propose to accomplish that? It costs nothing to attend public school, yet student drop-out rate is very high.
If you’re talking about educating women in Muslim countries, good luck. We tried that and as soon as we leave they return to their barbaric practices.
cecilia June 9th, 2014 at 6:45 pm
you give up easily.
the secret to success is persistence. Education is very long term project.
and you don’t have to do this ‘educating’ in a classroom.
There are groups (for example) who teach women in Africa to transform the local water into something drinkable using solar energy. These women become entrepreneurs.
They learn how to be self sufficient. The most powerful lesson in life.
Instead of wasting billions on bombs take that money and teach women to be independent.
will the men object? of course they will. They shot Malala because she wanted to be educated. Did that stop her? Not one bit. There are idiot creationists in America who want to deny an education to their own children here…..we have to keep fighting ignorance.
As a female person who got a great education and went on to a great career, trust me, there’s nothing more satisfying than living your life the way you want to
Bob Waas June 9th, 2014 at 7:16 pm
Interesting that you besmirch the creationists, since they are the ones who go on mission trips to help those people living in distressed areas around the world. My homeschooled granddaughter went to Spain two years in a row to teach English classes.
The people of faith are already doing much of what you are , suggesting, so how do propose to get others involved.
cecilia June 9th, 2014 at 7:43 pm
you bet I’ll ‘besmirch the creationists’
they lie to children – they are anti science. And that is a very dangerous disability to inflict on children.
And there is only one reason they go on their little ‘missions’ : to indoctrinate other children into their BS nonsense. They don’t really care about empowering women.
And my mother – being a catholic – tells me about what the catholic missions do around the world. Basically, I don’t have problem with the idea. Mostly because the catholic church is nowhere near as anti-science as evangelicals. (I was taught science in catholic school – at least in NY).
I have issues with the catholic church but it’s complicated and this is not the place for that discussion.
Anyway, the short answer is that when missions are teaching real subjects, helping out with solar energy projects, etc…I’m ok with those.
And there ARE groups of non-religious people who do similar activities to help people in need.
I just think we need more of that. It should be a number one priority rather than waste that money on war games.
Bob Waas June 9th, 2014 at 8:52 pm
Who told you creationist were anti science? Scientific evidence proves the existence of a creator more than science proves the reverse.
Mission trips are not to evangelize, but to bring aid to those in need. No words are necessary, their actions speak for them.
You have expressed what should be done. What have you done personally to make these things happen?
cecilia June 10th, 2014 at 9:38 am
wow. sorry but BS is not science.
There’s NO verifiable evidence for any supernatural entities.
and teaching children BS is dangerous. Children need to learn the truth and reality.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/us-students-lag-around-average-on-international-science-math-and-reading-test/2013/12/02/2e510f26-5b92-11e3-a49b-90a0e156254b_story.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2014/06/intelligent-design-slowly-going-out-of-style/372454/
As to how I have lived My life: I’ve used my talent (VFX) to educate.
One of the projects I’m most proud of is the telling of the Apollo Missions. That was an HBO series, “From the Earth to the Moon”. (17 Emmy nominations).
Considering that this country sent 12 humans walking around the Moon, it’s a tragedy that we have sunk so low. Fortunately not all of us are idiots. Some of us do try to reach higher.
Bob Waas June 10th, 2014 at 11:54 am
Funny you mentioned the Apollo project. I worked at the company that built the Lunar Module and had the pleasure of shaking hands with Jim Lovell when he returned from the Apollo 13 mission. Exactly how does that negate God’s presence?
We sunk so low because too many bought into the false narrative that there is no god, so there are no consequences for bad behavior, Listen to what Paul Harvey said many years ago. It supports my argument. http://stg.do/9LDc
Here is an atheist’s real goal in life. http://www.theminorityreportblog.com/2014/04/18/video-guy-proves-its-crazy-to-be-atheist-with-one-simple-and-hilarious-question/
cecilia June 10th, 2014 at 10:33 pm
theists MAKE the claim that gods exist
it’s up to them to prove their claims.
all I’m doing is pointing out that there’s no evidence for any gods.
I have ethics and morals because I have empathy. I don’t enjoy seeing people get hurt. There are clear repercussions for not caring about one’s fellow human beings – pollution, disease, early death for children, wasted talents, etc.
The silly notion that you are only a ‘good’ person because you are afraid of your imaginary friend getting mad at you is silly. And frankly, it doesn’t seem to be effective. Just look at the 800 bodies of those babies recently found in the sewer (Ireland: catholic orphanage).
Doesn’t sound as if those nuns were “afraid” of “gods” wrath.
Bob Waas June 11th, 2014 at 12:14 am
I guess you’re against abortion then. Good for you.
cecilia June 11th, 2014 at 7:18 pm
I don’t tell other women when or if they should have children. It’s none of my business.
And no one better tell me what I should do about that either.
Bob Waas June 12th, 2014 at 12:17 am
You argue against wars in which we have lost 848,000 since the beginning of time as a nation. Abortion has taken 55,772,015 million innocent lives since Roe vs. Wade in 1973.
If killing really bothers you, then abortion should also. That is the difference between those who believe in God and those who don’t; we fight for those who are unable to defend themselves.
When a woman uses the argument that it’s her body and she’ll do what she wants, she is wrong. The child growing in her body is not hers, it belongs to an innocent child.
cecilia June 12th, 2014 at 11:26 am
you have to be BORN first to be killed.
and if you don’t like abortion then don’t YOU have one
just learn to mind your own business
Bob Waas June 12th, 2014 at 6:01 pm
What kind of logic is that? You’re saying, kill them before they’re born so they don’t die in a senseless war.
cecilia June 13th, 2014 at 10:55 am
if you are so in love with a fetus, why don’t you marry one?
Bob Waas June 13th, 2014 at 5:05 pm
How can anyone marry a fetus; all the pro choice people are killing them. I guess if you don’t believe in God then killing the unborn doesn’t seem to be a moral issue you have to worry about.
Obewon June 13th, 2014 at 5:52 pm
‘Believe in God killing the unborn?’ 4+ natural miscarriages precede each live human birth proving how scientifically illiterate you anti-choice unconstitutional nutcase are. ‘God’s the greatest killer’-According to Satanic Wass logic.
Bob Waas June 13th, 2014 at 9:45 pm
Now you think you’re God and can decide who lives and who dies.
Obewon June 13th, 2014 at 10:27 pm
Your own bable instructs you to mind your own business, how to abort the unwanted and that their’s no soul until it breathes on it’s own for about 1 month. That’s why today just 11% want to outlaw last centuries women’s right to chose up until 24+ weeks via ex post utero fetal viability e.g. Mr & Mrs. Santorum’s 23 week late term abortion saving her life.
Bob Waas June 13th, 2014 at 10:58 pm
It has a heart beat and DNA. God creates all life.
I’ve never been against the decision to save a mother’s life. Of course your facts are wrong again.
The results of a nationwide CNN survey on abortion, the results of which confirm America’s anti-abortion trend. A solid majority (58 percent) of respondents espoused viewpoints associated with the pro-life movement; namely, that abortion should be legal under “few” or “no” circumstances. The ‘mostly illegal’ position represented a strong plurality at 38 percent. Meanwhile, just 40 percent of Americans said that the practice should be “always” or “mostly” legal. Also, public financing of abortion remains heavily unpopular:
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2014/03/06/cnn-poll-wide-divide-over-abortion/
Obewon June 13th, 2014 at 11:24 pm
You’ve always been against last century’s women’s right to choose and your own poll shows just 20% agree with you “one in five say abortion should always be illegal”-D’oh! The only two things you’ve ever been consistent on are 100% dishonesty with 100% errancy.
Bob Waas June 14th, 2014 at 11:36 am
Why do you always make up stats to suit your argument?
“A solid majority (58 percent) of respondents espoused viewpoints associated with the pro-life movement; namely, that abortion should be legal under “few” or “no” circumstances”
“40 percent of Americans said that the practice should be “always” or “mostly” legal.” Mostly legal covers those situations where the mother;s life is in danger.
Abortions were being paid for with government funds; that is why the strong language against it.
I’m for a woman’s right to choose, I just believe the choices should be: keep the baby or give it up for adoption; don’t murder it. On decisions like this, I always choose what God would choose.
Obewon June 14th, 2014 at 12:03 pm
Even GOP pollster Gallup proves just 21% agree with Wass on outlawing last centuries women’s right to chose.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/1576/abortion.aspx
OldLefty June 14th, 2014 at 12:04 pm
A new NBC/WSJ poll finds that, on the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, 70 percent of Americans want the landmark abortion rights ruling to stay.
Women will always do and have always done what they believe to be right for them.
The only issue now is should those choices be safe only for rich women?
But perhaps you should advocate for a program whereby the products of menstruation are examined every month….
just in case.
Bob Waas June 14th, 2014 at 12:21 pm
You need to read deeper into the results and other polls taken at the same time. From a Marist poll the headline read:
Poll: 56% Take Pro-Life Abortion Position, 80% Want More Limits
The more recent poll shows 58% take the pro-life position.
http://www.lifenews.com/2013/01/08/poll-56-take-pro-life-abortion-position-80-want-more-limits/
https://www.google.com/search?q=cnn+poll+on+abortion&rlz=1C1KAFA_enUS588US588&oq=cnn+poll+on+abortion&aqs=chrome..69i57.5152j0j4&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=0&ie=UTF-8
cecilia June 13th, 2014 at 6:07 pm
First Amendment:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion……………….”
in other words keep your religion to yourself and stop trying to shove it down everyone’s throat.
Your hubris is boring.
Women are NOT brood mares whose only value is to breed like beasts. your obsession with fetuses means you think women have NO use unless they carry a fetus to term.
I think we need to pass laws objecting to what YOU do with your sperm…because after all, you are nothing but an ambulatory sperm producer.
Bob Waas June 13th, 2014 at 9:04 pm
It is not religion which says not to kill. It is against the law in all 50 states. Pro-choice folks just redefined the term to suit their moral relativism.
cecilia June 13th, 2014 at 10:53 pm
you JUST wrote: “I guess if you don’t believe in God……..”
you don’t even keep track of your own lies.
Yes, you DO want to force your religion down everyone else’s throats.
It’s been LEGAL to get an abortion for decades…as it’s a medical issue which is no one’s business but a person and her doctor.
Mind your own business and keep out of other people’s doctor’s office. When I have to bring family members to the hospital I just don’t want to see YOU there weighing on every single medical decision. It’s offensive.
Justin Volke V June 1st, 2014 at 6:17 pm
When they return to the battlefield and kil dozens of other American soldiers will it still be a good trade?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 6:38 pm
Stop with the silly logical fallacies.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/loaded-question
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 6:46 pm
I’m glad our veteran has been released. I don’t agree with negotiating with terrorist because it will empower them.
Please note I said we can now blow them up “when” they rejoin the terrorist camps.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 7:21 pm
Real Christians don’t advocate for blowing any one up.
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 7:58 pm
So, according to your logic, all who advocate killing the enemy in war are not Christians. Please explain how that works.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 8:11 pm
We are talking about the Fascist GWOT.
Not any previous conflict.
Read The Book you claim as The Word of your Lord and Master.
Tell me what you find.
I’ll wait.
Obewon June 1st, 2014 at 8:25 pm
The oldest biblical text, the book of Barnabas says Judus was crucified and The book also calls the Apostle Paul “The Impostor”-All in pre-nicosia original Aramaic. ‘In Judas Name they prey…’ http://www.alan.com/2014/05/10/newly-discovered-1500-year-old-bible-says-jesus-was-never-crucified/
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 9:05 pm
TYVM!
It’s not enough for so called conservatives to live by the Golden Rule.
They want to dictate morality to others.
William June 1st, 2014 at 8:30 pm
So, according to your logic, all who advocate killing the enemy in war are not Christians. Please explain how that works.
Gladly
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 9:43 pm
I get it, you just let them kill you and all of your family because you’re interpretation of what God said is to not kill. I wonder how many on this site agree with you.
God never said that, He said you shall not commit murder. ” The Hebrew word for ‘murder’ literally means “the intentional, premeditated killing of another person with malice.” Interestingly, most of us are familiar with this definition of murder, because it is reflected in the penal codes of our country.” Here are a few places in the bible that may help explain the difference.
Exodus 22:2
If a thief is caught breaking in and is struck so that he dies, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed
A killing to protect an innocent person as in Exodus 2:11-12 and Genesis 14:14-16
To kill in self-defense is not murder, it is self preservation.
Obewon June 1st, 2014 at 10:39 pm
Satanic Wass now says ‘the 10 commandments are b/s God Never said or Wrote That’ because gun nuts can’t Zimmerman kids with Ice tea & skittles! Waaaa! And Jesus & Santa are white guys too said Megyn Kelly Fauxing news: I’m just getting this. “I just learned Jesus may not be a white guy” FoxFail every evening just blew 17% of her audience away from May 2013-14.
Bob Waas Sr. June 2nd, 2014 at 10:48 am
Do you ever have a lucid moment? Your postings are really strange.
Obewon June 2nd, 2014 at 11:51 am
“God never said that, He said you shall not commit murder.”Waas’ circuitous fables, falsely attempting to rationalize his zeal for killing, guns & xenophobia are just plain ridicules. St Reagan even says you’re full of crap: ‘In this day and age their is no need for any private citizen to walk around carrying a loaded weapon’-1985 Ronald Reagan on gun bans he enacted & supported including Clinton’s 1993-2003 Assault Weapons Ban that GWB overturned by not renewing.
William June 2nd, 2014 at 8:10 am
I get it, you just let them kill you and all of your family because you’re interpretation of what God said is to not kill.
When and if I detect a threat to me and/or my family, I will deal with it (my careers have been all about threat assessment).
Your idiotic post is the same mentality that led us to invade Iraq because people from Saudi Arabia and the UAE attacked us on 911.
Hey good job quoting the old testament. Did you kill all your neighbors that ignored the Sabbath? You better get busy.
If you have a maid it’s also ok to beat the sh*t out of her as long as she doesn’t up and die.
And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished.”
“Notwithstanding, if he continue a day or two, he shall not be punished: for he is his money — Exodus 21:20-21
Lunch must be fun at your house eh?
So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son.”
— 2 Kings 6:29
The Bible…the last refuge of an idiot who has no credible argument of his own.
Congrats on making the grade.
Bob Waas Sr. June 2nd, 2014 at 10:47 am
William – you are interpreting the bible without studying the context. Not all kings walked with God, and Jehoram is a prime example. God did not command him to eat the woman’s son, he did so out of sinful behavior.
You quote Exodus 21: 20-21 as if it is permissible to beat one’s slave. Rather, it is the punishment for doing so.
A commentary on the verse explains it this way, “The text does not condone the beating of the slave at all. Rather, the text is describing what the punishment is *for* beating one’s slave to death. That is, the text actually *condemns* beating a slave to death. In the one case, the slave owner is punished by being put to death. In the other case, which is an unintentional death by beating, the slave owner is punished in terms of his own financial loss from having beaten his slave to death. The implication is that he did not intend to kill his slave, but was still wrong in beating the slave. Otherwise there would be no mention of punishment in either case. But as it is, there is a punishment in both cases here for beating a slave to death. In the first case of intentionally beating a slave to death, the slave owner is likewise to be put to death. In the second case of unintentionally beating a slave to death, the slave owner’s own foolish financial loss serves as his punishment.”
Exactly how does my discussing about when it is permissible for a Christian to kill, the kind of mentality that led us to war in Iraq? Is it the same kind that got us involved in Bosnia and Libya?
It is the typical response by atheist to jump to conclusions using cherry picked bible quotes. And, it is the typical response of liberals to resort to character assassination or name calling when debating a subject..
William June 2nd, 2014 at 1:17 pm
you are interpreting the bible without studying the context.
Says the guy who justifies killing with old testament verse….
You’re still the same old Botz Waas we have grown to love to laugh at.
Don’t ever change.
TiredOfThemAll June 2nd, 2014 at 11:07 am
I get it, you just let them kill you and all of your family because you’re interpretation of what God said is to not kill.
______
That’s a straw man.
Nobody thinks that.
They just disagree on the nature of the threat and how to deal with it.
Sko Hayes June 1st, 2014 at 6:40 pm
Um, the deal is that the detainees are being held in Qatar until all troops are out of Afghanistan. But don’t let facts get in the way of a perfectly silly post.
Obewon June 1st, 2014 at 2:57 pm
This is so great how the uninformed 24% remaining repubs keep flushing themselves down their own outhouses! Woosh! Another GOP Plan implodes: ‘That POW should’a been held by Taliban for 30+ more days while Boehner’s Least Popular Congress in US History screws up the release & blames GOP frauds on Obama!’
Justin Volke V June 1st, 2014 at 6:07 pm
Boehners least popular Congress? Senate is still democratic majority. How is Reid’s senate not responsible as well?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 6:11 pm
Reid couldn’t overcome filibusters by an intransigent GOP.
You don’t know this?
Justin Volke V June 1st, 2014 at 6:15 pm
Filibusters? Name one that was successful? Straw men. Besides with the nuclear option invoked republicans cannot block a single Obama appointee. Or did you forget that?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 6:23 pm
We aren’t talking about Obama appointee’s.
That’s a straw man.
No successful filibusters?
You going with that?
Really?
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/recent-business/bills-blocked-by-republican-filibusters
Obewon June 1st, 2014 at 7:44 pm
FNLED & Sko Hayes, it’s clear the mislead don’t know Boehner’s proposed ‘Keep ‘Merica safe by leaving Obama’s POW with the Taliban’ legislation, like SCOTUS appointees are exempt from Leader Reid’s enacted Phase I return to sanity via the nuclear option. Woo-doggy, I think it’s too late for the dim & dimmer crowd to begin reading their news, instead of having it misread to them.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 7:47 pm
The lack of self awareness in these people continues to astound.
TYVM for the work you do Obie 😉
Obewon June 1st, 2014 at 7:59 pm
TYVM Quid pro quo:) The GOP is extra ticked off they can’t go-Issa in a faux ‘BerGdahl lives with the Talliban, he should stay with the Taliban.’ -Gots to ‘Keep ‘Merica safe by leaving Obama’s POW with the Taliban’ legislation,
Sko Hayes June 1st, 2014 at 6:35 pm
Name one that was successful? They’ve had well over a hundred fillibusters, which means that a bill wasn’t passed or the nominee didn’t get a hearing.
You know that filibusters don’t just cover the president’s nominees, right?
Justin Volke V June 1st, 2014 at 8:26 pm
And how many bills has the house sent to the senate that didn’t even get a vote because Reid wouldn’t send them to the floor?
Your list of bills blocked all seemed to me to be bills that should have been stopped. They all expanded the power of government and diminished the freedom of citizens.
Even artificially keeping tuition loan rates low causes a larger supply of money chasing seats in college and driving tuition costs up. That leaves graduates with more debt and higher overall cost of education despite the lower interest rate. Lower tuition pan rates only enrichen college professors and deans pocketbooks.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 9:16 pm
“And how many bills has the house sent to the senate that didn’t even get a vote because Reid wouldn’t send them to the floor?”
What rational thinking American would even entertain a bill laden with Fascist enabling poison pills?
Are you daft?
http://www.leftinalabama.com/diary/9886/senate-gop-filibusters-jobs-bill-when-democrats-refuse-to-swallow-their-poison-pill-amendments
” Lower tuition pan rates only enrichen college professors and deans pocketbooks.”
Baseless assertion.
Wall street was taken out of the middleman skim operator position for good reason.
Land grant Colleges should still be tuition free and can be again.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 9:18 pm
“Your list of bills blocked all seemed to me to be bills that should have
been stopped. They all expanded the power of government and diminished
the freedom of citizens.”
[citations missing]
William June 1st, 2014 at 5:40 pm
It doesn’t matter what the President does. Right-wing-wacko land will disapprove. So which draft dodger do you think will whine the loudest and longest about a soldier coming home as a result of this trade? (I’m taking a pool)
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 6:49 pm
Speaking of draft dodgers.
William June 1st, 2014 at 7:15 pm
I don’t like using the term “Stupid Limbaugh licking idiot without an original thought”…so I won’t
BUT…
When the draft ended in 1973, President Obama was 7 years old.
Obewon June 1st, 2014 at 7:52 pm
William and let’s not forget Clinton42 earned a Rhodes Scholar 165+ Minimum IQ exemption in 1968 and served his country very well! American politician, 42nd President of the United States, 1993–2001, Governor of Arkansas, 1979–1981 & 1983–1993. I doubt if room temp IQ Wass knows how badly beaten his cerebral implosion is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Rhodes_Scholars
Bob Waas Sr. June 2nd, 2014 at 1:12 pm
And Gates, Jobs, and Limbaugh became successful millionaires without a college degree. Obama received a Nobel peace award and then proceeded to drone the enemy, Gore received a Nobel award built on lies, Krugman received a Pulitzer and is wrong on just about every issue in his chosen field.
Credentials don’t mean the individual has good character, it just means they were good students.
foxnewslieseveryday June 3rd, 2014 at 5:56 am
Multi millionaire drug addicted, 4 time married pedophiles are better than a Nobel peace award winner?
LMAO!
Are you even an American?
Obewon June 3rd, 2014 at 7:25 am
Limbots unlocked & entered into an anti-thought dimension, where they now reside in the Satanic Twilight Zone! Nobel Peace Prize winners are bad, because the Satanic RWNJ Evilangelical war criminals that they voted for, are worshiped as ‘their own personal Satin.’
foxnewslieseveryday June 3rd, 2014 at 5:16 pm
“Krugman received a Pulitzer and is wrong on just about every issue in his chosen field.”
Another silly baseless assertion from the phony Christian and so called fiscal conservative.
Name one issue he is wrong on.
I’ll wait
Bob Waas Sr. June 1st, 2014 at 8:43 pm
Clinton was a draft dodging hippie who never inhaled. Obama could have enlisted but he probably wouldn’t have passed the physical with all the pot in his system.
William June 2nd, 2014 at 10:26 am
Clinton was a draft dodging hippie who never inhaled…
who left this nation with the first balanced budget since Eisenhower.
Bob Waas Sr. June 2nd, 2014 at 11:08 am
A balanced budget thanks to a Republican controlled Congress. Clinton learned how to work “with” Congress, unlike the joker in the WH now who thinks he is a king and uses the Constitution as a suggestion.
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 7:44 pm
Only one was AWOL.
http://www.awolbush.com/
fancypants June 2nd, 2014 at 12:16 am
got to admire how Ronnie fell in love with the Taliban.
He even took a photo op with words of wisdom
Bob Waas Sr. June 2nd, 2014 at 11:27 am
The Taliban didn’t exist when Reagan was president, so as typical, distortion of the truth.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4AQ_rMRV5z8
fancypants June 3rd, 2014 at 8:56 am
Im not a political genius bobby but im sticking to my guns based on how they are dressed it looks to me these people are the same who were chopping off heads in Afghanistan and other parts of the middle east. The name might change but the objective lives on.
BTW the gop is no stranger to public deception and who knows? they might have a few more youtube videos out there
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/23/bush.iraq/index.html
Bob Waas Sr. June 3rd, 2014 at 9:06 pm
Don’t you know it is racist to judge people on how they are dressed? Juan Williams was fired by NPR for doing the same thing. Besides, these people practice the religion of peace.
Sticking to your guns when you’re wrong is not exactly a sign of a genius.
fancypants June 4th, 2014 at 11:53 pm
too bad my name isn’t juan Williams. Besides it looks like he got a better job offer…no big loss
Bob Waas June 5th, 2014 at 9:00 am
I agree, Juan is in a much better place. You and Bill O’Reilly have something in common, he said Bergdahl’s father looked and sounded like a Muslim and the PC police scolded him; even though what he said was accurate.
fancypants June 5th, 2014 at 8:42 pm
once again bob I didn’t drag bergdahl’s father into any of my conversations. billy owns that trick pony and it stays in the barn until 8pm mon-fri
Bob Waas June 5th, 2014 at 9:10 pm
Your comment was no different than O’Reilly’s or Juan’s. You all made a conclusion based on their looks and dress and O’Reilly mentioned language spoken. You were all correct, so what’s the problem? I was pulling your leg about being a racist for pointing out the obvious.
fancypants June 5th, 2014 at 10:06 pm
oh so your a race baiter as well ? and don’t compare me to bill, I don’t drag people’s kids and family into my conversations to intimidate. Bill needs the ratings and I don’t .
Bob Waas June 6th, 2014 at 12:19 am
Race baiter? No, that would be Obama, Sharpton, and Jackson. I was just imitating a liberal by suggesting you were making a racist remark. The pulling your leg part got lost due to your lack of a sense of humor.
fancypants June 6th, 2014 at 6:51 pm
you getting rid of that negative Hillary avatar was a good gesture here on LL. keep up the good work !
TiredOfThemAll June 2nd, 2014 at 11:05 am
Actually Bush was a draft dodger.
Why now drunk photo of Bush?
And funny how the non service Democrats begin AFTER the draft.
Does that mean YOU”RE in favor?
Bob Waas Sr. June 2nd, 2014 at 11:40 am
You really need to stop relying on Obewon’s postings as reliable data. First, explain how George W. Bush could be a draft dodger if he was in the military? You can’t, so don’t hurt yourself thinking about that one. The ultra liberals falsely accused him of going AWOL. They tend to make unfounded accusations like that. You know, like Harry Reid accusing Mitt of not paying taxes, which when proven false old Harry never apologized.
Here is some information you may want to spend time refuting:
“Bush may have received favorable treatment to get into the Guard, served irregularly after the spring of 1972 and got an expedited discharge, but he did accumulate the days of service required of him for his ultimate honorable discharge.”
Source #2: http://www.geocities.com/bush_not_awol/
“So, while the Democrats have spread this malicious, fradulent accusation that he went AWOL (without a shred of evidence) with the help of the liberal media, George W. Bush released copies of microfilm payroll records summarizing the days for which Bush was paid in 1972 and 1973. Though blurry and hard to read, they reflect payments for 82 days of services in 1972 and 1973. Guardsmen were required to get a minimum of 50 points annually and they received 15 just for being members of the guard. Bush accumlated 56 points from May 1972 to 1973 and he accumalted another 56 points in June & July of 1973 meeting the minimum requirement of 50 points for the May 73 to May 74 period. Despite the clear evidence that he served, Democrats still keep the lies coming.”
Notice, Bush released microfilm payroll records. I guess he didn’t have anything to hide; unlike Obama who paid a million dollars to keep his personal information from the public; and liberals don’t even wonder why.
TiredOfThemAll June 2nd, 2014 at 12:02 pm
There is a reason why the commander called it the Champagne Unit, (as Bush supported the war)
He was was permanently suspended from flying with the Texas Air National Guard for having missed an annual medical examination.
http://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/this-day-in-politics-aug-1-1972-95023.html#ixzz33UxElq1L
Bob Waas Sr. June 2nd, 2014 at 1:06 pm
Remind me again, what office is George W running for, or what country is he president of? Your attempt to deflect attention from the sorry excuse for human existence; aka as the Democratic leadership is not working.
TiredOfThemAll June 2nd, 2014 at 2:47 pm
YOU are the one who brought who served where.
Clearly Democratic leadership is fighting an uphill battle to clean up Republican “leadership”.
Justin Volke V June 1st, 2014 at 6:02 pm
We now have a precedent of negotiating with terrorists. That will dramatically change foreign policy forever. Not for the better.
As much as I hate to admit it I’m afraid that conservatives are right on this one. Even a broken watch is right twice a day.
The next demand will be to release 10 detainees and then 20 and when will it end?
foxnewslieseveryday June 1st, 2014 at 6:31 pm
That precedent started with Reagan during Iran/contra.
You didn’t know this?
“The next demand will be to release 10 detainees and then 20”
Baseless assertion
Sko Hayes June 1st, 2014 at 6:31 pm
Sorry, Reagan was the first president to negotiate with terrorists- remember he sold arms to the Iranians to try to get them to release our hostages.
Sunka June 1st, 2014 at 8:27 pm
I see this as a good decision by Obama. Thanks, Mr. President! Now get busy & get that VA scandal straightened out. We’ve got thousands of sick & disabled vets who need help!
waybackwhen June 1st, 2014 at 11:30 pm
Obama is MUCH MORE INTERESTED in saving Muslims than American Citizens!
Obewon June 1st, 2014 at 11:54 pm
Yeah that’s why GWB’s Pakistan EKIA topped out at 36 in 2008.
Key Findings in the Pakistan Drone War: The CIA drone campaign began in Yemen in 2002 and in Pakistan in 2004. -Drone strikes in Pakistan rose steadily under President Barack Obama in 2009, to their peak of 122 in 2010. http://natsec.newamerica.net/drones/pakistan/analysis
William June 3rd, 2014 at 11:54 am
Obama is MUCH MORE INTERESTED in saving Muslims than American Citizens!
Unlike Republican presidents.