Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Posted by brushworks Zone5-Ohio (My Page) on
Tue, May 15, 12 at 21:18

Human rights organizations are criticizing the Obama administration�s decision to resume military sales to Bahrain despite the ruling monarchy�s ongoing repression of pro-democracy protests.

The announcement came just days after the Bahraini government vowed "tougher action" in its crackdown on protesters.

Doctors were arrested, assaulted and imprisoned for treating protesters.

Who's side are you on?

Here is a link that might be useful: Empowering Acts of Aggression


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Life is cheap when there are military sales to be made.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

So what's the story? US is furnishing weapons to the Bahraini gov't to subdue (permanently?) protesters?


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

I included a video. It's worth viewing.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Another good reason for me not to vote for him again thanks for the article. Does that mean your not voting for Romney he's itching to demonize Russia all over again. If you wont vote for Romney I wont vote for Obama.
I walked a picket line with one of the writers, Juan Gonzales & I worked for the Daily News many years ago. Good Guy.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

I think you guys may need a third party candidate.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

I can't vote for either party this time.

Gary Johnson is a good consideration.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

And not voting for either party helps ... how?


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Johnson wants to cue defense by 43 % the powers that be will never permit that.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

labrea said:
Another good reason for me not to vote for him again

Not voting for Obama is fine, but i am suprised that as an ouspoken supporter of gay rights you would come to that decision in good concsience. For most gay people having the recognition of their rights from the leader of the free world has been empowering. On the other hand, if Romney wins and appoints Supreme Ct. Justices that could have a negative impact on gay rights for generations to come. Perhaps you need to do some sould searching to understand why you would in essence support that result.

As far as the OP link, it presents a legitimate issue about how we should deal with a foreign country commits human rights violations and represses protests. With China, they do not need our weapons for border security so we build Walmarts here to sell goods made there. of course there are other countries that commit human rights violations that we sell weapons to, from Israel, to Saudi Arabia.

As far as the weapons deal with bahrain, that was agreed to in the 1990's and what was the purpose of it? Oh, it had nothing to do with the violence against protestors.

===============================
The administration informed Congress that "for national security interests we have decided to release additional items and services for the Bahrain Defense Force, the Coast Guard, and the National Guard for the purpose of helBahrain is an important security partner and ally in a region facing enormous challenges. Maintaining our and our partners' ability to respond to these challenges is a critical component of our commitment to Gulf security."

The United States and Bahrain signed a defense pact in 1991. Bahrain is home to the U.S. Fifth Fleet and is viewed as an important bulwark against Iran's influence in the Persian Gulf.

Two U.S. officials, who spoke to CNN on the condition of anonymity, said the weapons being sold, including air-to-air missiles, are designed to offer interoperability between the two countries' militaries.

Nuland said the items being released by the United States "are not used for crowd control," and that the United States is maintaining holds on TOW missiles and Humvees that Congress was told about last October, as well as additional items for the Bahrain Defense Force and Ministry of the Interior. Equipment for Coast Guard and units deployed in Afghanistan are exempted, she said.
-------------

So this story is just misguided sensationalism and does not set forth the considerations or limitations on the decision, or put it in any regional or historic perspective.

Anyone who would want an anti-War pacifist to be President is living in an alternate reality. The President is the head of our military and has the primary responsibility to keep our country safe and to protect our allies and interests overseas. This decision was entirely consistent with Obama's duty as our President.

Here is a link that might be useful: Anti-Obummers twist facts about Bahrain arms


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Heri..I don't get it either. Not voting at all seems counter productive to me. Just don't come here and complain then. If any of you lefties don't vote for Obama, just wait till the Supreme Court is more rabidly right than it is now. Your rights as you know them would cease to exist and Roe vs Wade would be history. Ruth Ginsburg isn't exactly the picture of health. Tell me any of you want another Thomas or Scalia.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters


Your OP is misleading.

From your own link:

There are two minor reasons and one big reason. You know, the minor reasons are the military base in Bahrain, which the U.S. doesn't want to lose, concern about Iranian influence just across the Persian Gulf, in the fact that Bahrain has a majority Shia population, like Iran. There's fear of influence there. But I think the dominant reason is Saudi Arabia. Bahrain is a little island linked by a causeway to Saudi Arabia. And Saudi Arabia simply is not going to tolerate a genuine democracy immediately off its shore, particularly one in which Shias, if there were free elections, could easily prevail. That would set a precedent, in particular, for Saudi Arabia's Eastern Province, the oil-producing province which itself has a very substantial Shia population. And the monarchy in Saudi Arabia simply is drawing a line and saying, "No way." And the U.S. is deferring to that.

~~Kenneth Roth, Human Rights watch

The US war industry, and moreover (or, thus), the US-American overconsumption of oil caused this evil.

So why is your post misleading?


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Esh,

I said, I can't vote for either party. That doesn't mean I won't vote. Context is king. Same to your follower, Lily.

maddie,

You have been attacking conservatives on finance, but you approve of Obama's war on the poor. I don't get you. Please remove the rose colored glasses until "after" the election. :) Obama doesn't need your support. He has the unions, corporate America, Hollywood 1%, and of course his favorite child, Wall Street.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Wed, May 16, 12 at 7:17

....there has been a "silent" ok to use military weapons against protesters much closer to home.

I not only took off my rose-colored glasses, I stepped on them.

Watch Chicago .. the mayor of that fair city made his fortune as an investment banker. Not hard to guess who he represents.

Or any of them for that matter ...


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Brush, I know you plan to vote - I'm not stupid. But if you don't vote for one of the two major candidates then your vote is just a token protest vote. There will not be enough votes for a third party to matter.

So especially in a swing state like Ohio, that means you are ok with whoever wins. And I guess you have said the two parties aren't significantly different to you so that's ok.

But one of them WILL win. Your petulant vote for "your conscience" won't matter. Take off YOUR glasses (I hesitate to call them blinders) and see what distinctions are there to see - I agree that in some areas there are not a lot of differences, but there are SOME differences. I can't believe that some of those differences don't matter to you. Do you truly believe that in some areas Obama's administration has not made an improvement in how healthcare is viewed, support for the downtrodden and the middle class, support for women's rights, and foreign policy? Certainly he is not perfect, but not voting for the Democrat means we go backward on these things. Republicans will repeal healthcare as much as they can and they will NOT move forward with an alternative. Social Secuirty and Medicare will get cut so that defense spending will increase - at least Obama is willing to cut defense spending as part of overall cuts. And new wars? Is there any doubt in your mind that with Republicans in control the US will attack Iran? Obama may not have gotten out of Afghanistan like you wanted, but he didn't take our troops into new wars either.

With Obama, I feel like we move forward. Four years was not enough to turn this ship around, to fix all the messes left behind - including the wars.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

I have said before and I'll say it again having these summits in large urban cities is just plain wrong!

Some very bad dudes are going to show up in Chicago and they are going to do some very serious damage and endanger peoples lives. The police have a near impossible task to figure out who the bad guys are and control them...which is their job , by the way.

Problem is the great majority of peaceful protesters will wear the actions of a few and the the actions of a few jerk cops will tarnish the others who would just as soon be writing traffic tickets!

The real "criminals" in this are the idiots who allow summits like this to be held in places like Chicago.....nothing but vanity and at what cost? Stick them up in a chalet in the Rockies and close off the only road in and out!


 o
Working 9 to 5

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Wed, May 16, 12 at 7:50

Well slap my mouth and call me a "token voter" then, because I cannot and will not vote against my own conscience ... the dems have left the house along with the conservatives. What we have here folks is a "corporate owned/ran government". And neither party is gonna cut that cord.

Foxes (investment bankers etal) guarding the hen house and the sheep grazing quietly.

Peace and Love I am off to the coal mine :)


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Esh agree with everything you said . A protest vote in a swing state could have real consequences.
What about the court?
Are you okay with a more conservative supreme court for years to come?
I'm not. We need a balanced court.
Think about the citizens united case, brought to us by a right leaning court.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

I understand not voting against your conscience, ohiomom. I'm not jumping up and down to vote for Barack Obama - I'd like a better choice. In my state, it doesn't even matter - Georgia will go to Romney anyway. But I will vote for Obama just to show Romney that not everyone in Georgia believes in HIM.

The point I'm making is that when Romney wins Ohio by 2000 votes and those 2000 votes were due to people "not voting" or "voting for the 3rd party" and Romney wins the election and becomes President of the US - are you ok with that? Are you ok with what happens under Romney for the next four years - including potentially new justices on the Supreme Court as chloe says? Or perhaps you hope that it will force the revolution to happen that much sooner? ;)


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

The point I'm making is that when Romney wins Ohio by 2000 votes and those 2000 votes were due to people "not voting" or "voting for the 3rd party" and Romney wins the election and becomes President of the US - are you ok with that? Are you ok with what happens under Romney for the next four years - including potentially new justices on the Supreme Court as chloe says?

I'm better than ok with that, in fact it seems like the majority of voters are ok with that.


 o
@RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

The question was to people intending to either not vote or vote for a third party, mrskjun.


 o
?????RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

You mean you didn't ask if they would be ok if Romney won if they didn't vote? Weren't you making the assumption that if they did vote, it would be a vote for Obama? Why would you assume that?


 o
@@RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Yes, mrskjun, I was. Sigh. So let me rephrase:

Regards of WHO wins, if that person wins by the number of votes that were withheld or diverted due to matters of conscience, will you be ok with the outcome?


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

So Mrs, you think the Citizens United case was GREAT for the country????? Really????? It is okay for businesses to buy our elected officials???? REALLY??????

Me thinks you speak out of both sides of your mouth when it comes to the social issues you SAY you want your party to stay out of.

If the court leans even further right, we'll be getting some legislation about women's health and gay civil rights.
It would victory at last for the conservative movement. And, "I'm better than ok with that, in fact it seems like the majority of voters are ok with that."

I think you've finally exposed yourself. I now can see what is behind your unwavering support of conservatism.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Esh, I guess I can say that if MY vote for a third party candidate brings the defeat of Obama, I did my job. :)

But please, don't tell people how to vote or challenge their freedom to vote as they choose. It's so Un-American.


 o
!!RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

But please, don't tell people how to vote or challenge their freedom to vote as they choose. It's so Un-American.

I'm sorry if you think that is what I'm trying to do. I am only encouraging people to think things all the way through. Sounds like you have done that.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

omg I've been exposed!!! Guess what? I'm going to vote for Romney too...gasp!!!


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

brush, can you name a president since WW2 that hasn't seen weapons sold to repressive regimes? Heck, the U.S. was/is happy to sell arms to repressive regimes - Democratic or Republican president.

How did you feel about President Reagan arming death-squad governments in El Salvador and Guatemala? Hiring, training and arming mercenaries to overthrow the Sandinista government? If there ever were a president making war against the poor of other countries, that would be Ronald Reagan.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

I'm totally with esh and chloe. I'm not 100 per cent pleased with everything Obama has done for this nation, but I would not stay home and I would not waste my vote by a write in for an independent candidate. I vote my conscience even if it means voting for the lesser of the evils.

I cannot bear to think of a future, even more right leaning court and what it would do to gays and womens rights, nor how Romney and his cohorts will dismantle the social safety nets if elected.

I must admit I would ask the same question of Joe that heri asked, re not voting.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Yep, I've done that, Esh. And if Nancy would have had her way in 2008, Obama would not be president today. Shall we chastise Nancy for voting against Obama?

Nancy, Ronald is dead. The sad part is, his legend of war, along with that of all others, still lives on today, supported by the current administration. There has been no change!

What do you suggest, Nancy? Let it go on without a protest? Shut down the "other" voices?

Shall we just spend time discussing previous regimes, or do you wish for an America that changes and actually moves toward peace? No sense in supporting peace and protests if you condone the following of past presidents.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Shall we chastise Nancy for voting against Obama?

I'm not "chastising" anyone. I'm trying to have a discussion about voting for third party candidates (or not voting) in swing states. Which, by the way, is not true for Nancy; she is not in a swing state.

You are so against the US being at war with other countries - I find it hard to believe you would be willing to let Romney win and take that aggression further than Obama would. I guess you don't see it that way.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Brush, I'm not in a swing state. I could not vote for Obama in 2008 because of his promise to escalate the war in Afghanistan. It will not matter how I vote in November because California will not go for Romney.

I'm more inclined to vote for President Obama in 2012 - still not decided - because he seems determined to avoid a military confrontation with Iran. I believe that Romney and his neocon friends will push for an attack. And then there's always the challenge of nominating justices to the Supreme Court.

There has been no change!

The U.S. has been on its current trajectory since the end of WW2. I'm sorry that you're just now realizing the human cost of maintaining of world-wide military power, but it will take more than protest votes to turn around the Titanic. Our bloated military budget and adventurism will be the cause of our collapse.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

A vote or no vote of conscience most certainly matters if u have escaped a group identity & struggle to maintain individuation.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

I agree with Esh and the rest of the progressives who commented on this "vote" matter.

If one votes for a party which can't possibly win and won't even register it's voter percentage to anyone of consequence as even meaningful - then the vote has been thrown to Romney and to his future appointments to the Supreme Court.

And then, instead of a centerist to the left in the White House, you will have a flaming righter instead. Those are the only two choices to us.

Every Romney appointee will vote ensure that you remain in that group identity slot you have been designated to, Joe.

Romney has already made his stand regarding the civil right for your segment of American citizens to marry and that he intends to do what is necessary in order to federally enforce it.

"A vote of conscience" is a prism which can be viewed in many different lights and each new twist producing a different prism color is as accurate as the last. It is not possible to change the system in your lifetime - that will not happen. Your vote will not even register your disapproval to anyone but yourself. It's important to make your vote work for you and your countrymen in as many possible ways as possible. It's all we have.

Nothing in politics will ever produce a politician with clean hands or even cleaner hands than those in the past - they are all dirty and have been bought off by the time they have gained the power they want.

Conservatives understand this. I'm betting they don't like their dirty politicians either - but they understand that it's all they have and all that will ever be offered to them. A successful politician is a dirty politician, that's how politics in this country set up it's politics to function, it's how power is gained -

The voter might as well try to use the dirty politician as much as possible for his own best interests and what he personally thinks is the best interests of his fellow Americans.

Mrsk certainly will, and though she says she wants every single American to be able to exercise the civil rights they already have - civil rights for all Americans is not a top priority, as her vote will reflect.

Obama is better than the alternative and we are going to end up with Obama or the alternative. This is likely to be a close election just as the Bush/Gore was a close election. Each of us better make that vote work for us as best as we can.

Some day a third party will rise up and will be such a great alternative that it might very well change politics in America for awhile - until those politicians get bought off so completely also. Until then, we better use what we have and wring it dry in our favor.

My own take on it.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Have the people with objections to how things have been done or are perceived to be done written to the people doing those things and asked for an explanation or suggested to them alternatives that would be more in line with that voter's thinking? You may get an answer that will at the least give you more information.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Actually Don - speaking for myself, since I voted for Obama I have written him six letters (on good paper, enveloped stamped and mailed etc.) telling him about both my approval/disapproval over various subjects. As I have the reps in my state. I don't hear back at all from the reps, I get a standard issue reply from the White House, as expected. But I write and will continue to.

I read where a typed or clearly written hand written letter stamped and mailed is what they really pay attention to - the staff just deletes all emails and especially those mass emails of mass signings of petitions etcs are ignored.

My state rep's internet page site states this quite clearly - paper, stamp, envelope, three short paragraphs straight to the point - very polite is very important - that is what is read and considered.

So that is exactly what I have done when doing all letter writing to all politicians.

I got a lot of flak when I first came into this site and said that I was doing this - mostly from the right - "what good do you think that does? Who told you emails don't get read??" - but I did it anyway and continue to do so.

That and my vote is all I CAN do, then I volunteer for those who are in need or want - and donate what I can to charities which do important work, always locally, frequently one or two major charities.

This is all I can do. Coming in this forum and endlessly squabbling and complaining doesn't amount to beans - I try do what I can.

I will do no volunteer work nor (god forbid!) install any lawn signs or (god forbid even more harshly!) bumper stickers for any political person or party. Actually, I have never done bumper stickers at all, for any reason, ever.

The rear bumpers on our vehicles have always remained virginal! ;)


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Posted by mrskjun 9 (My Page) on
Wed, May 16, 12 at 9:17

omg I've been exposed!!! Guess what? I'm going to vote for Romney too...gasp!!!

*

Me too, me too!

And send him money, too !


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Mylab it's just my opinion that I am what I vote so I will really ahve to see a close race in ordere to cast my vote for Mr Obama again & and from where I'm sitting it's not going to be close. Voting for the lesser of 2 evils is still an action to affirm evil on the hope some good may come of it.
The Major evil as far as I see is the same old tired Bush economic strategies with calls for even fewer controls on wall street & banks & calls for a build up of an offensive armed forces going deeper into debt to pay for it. Death on Credit as opposed to maintenance of lives on credit.
Oh and An American Century arrogant repeated that was Bush Rumsfeld Cheney goal.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Guess this means nothing to you, Mrs and Demi.

We aren't all equal in your eyes are we??????????


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

chloe, there are some issues that trump equal rights, the likelihood of of more wars, extending existing wars and reducing the debt solely on the backs of the middle class.

Personal income taxes are the single most important issue to many. Oh they will cloak it in statements about how the government spends "their" money poorly, like liberal don't pay taxes too, but the bottom line is their personal bank accounts above all else.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Wed, May 16, 12 at 16:57

....fine I will not vote for a third party, I will stay home that day and cut my toenails.

Dropping out folks, you will never miss me :)


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

So, Michael, are you going to adress your own link?


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Thank you Joe for going into more deeply in your reasons for your choice and really, nothing you say can be denied.

Ohiomom, I most sincerely hope that I misunderstood and you are NOT announcing that you are leaving the forum. You are a valuable member here and would most certainly be missed.

I do hope I misunderstood.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Ohiomom, I would miss you very much....very, very much. You speak for the majority who are, in reality, a minority. You root us...at least me.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Joe, I have been saying that same thing about voting for evil. But when I say it some consider it offensive and attack my right to do so. Nothing new at HT.

Swing state or not, I make the choice how to vote. It's sad to hear some of you imply that voting is a game of strategy for you. I will vote, but it will not be for either of the two evil parties. When I leave the polls, I'll be at peace with my decision, not making an excuse why I voted for evil, or have to wash my hands of it.

I'm sad tonight. I received an email from my favorite congressman. He is retiring.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Bummer, my fav State Senator, Jim Holperin (D), is too. It's a shame, because he survived a recall recently. I guess the stress is too much. He's going to help his wife with her toy store.

Seems like the good ones do retire. Like maybe they won't put up with the deceit anymore.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Brush, I don't wish to imply that I'm attacking your right to do what you wish with your vote - it's YOUR vote to do with as you choose.

I was questioning the result you could reasonably expect to get from how you said you would use your vote though - especially with what you have had to complain about since Obama began his term. And the wars which have concerned not only you byt the rest of us. A lot of us had skin in those wars.

But it makes no difference in the long run - if you feel like you can use your vote in the way you intend to and walk away with clean hands - then I say have at it.

But then, please extend the same to the rest of us and how it is we feel we also must use our single vote.

I wish for many things when i cast my vote and one who I feel stands the best chance at avoiding getting us into another war situation, if possible, is on my top five list.

Actively supporting and actively doing everything they can to enforce the civil rights of the very Americans they are elected serve is on my top five list.

Working to continue to improve the economy is on my top five list.

Working for the best interests and futures of ALL Americans, especially those in need - rather than in the best interests of a select grouping of Americans, is on my top five list.

How it is we use our natural resources and how we will try to come up with new ways of using renewable resources would be on my top five list.

For me, it works best to vote for one of the two who will win the election rather than refusing to vote for either who will win. That is how I choose to exercise my voting right.

I don't claim that we have clean and honest people running for the top position - nobody gets into the top running spots without having been bought off and beholding to.

This is how one gains political power in this country and no matter how much we hate it, it is unlikely to change in our lifetime. If we haven't been able to get rid of the lobbyists yet, it's unlikely that will happen in the next 30 years.

So, the choice of the next President will win by the choice of the people nd I want to be sure I have registered my choice, so that I can also feel like I did my own best regardless of who wins. That is how I feel my own vote can be best used.

You choose your personal method to speak via your vote, I choose mine. My husband will choose to speak with his vote as a protest - he also has that right.

I must confess, I do have a hard time supporting those who don't choose to vote, period - and then endlessly complain about whoever wins the election and what that winner does or does not do with that power he wins, or about the wars and how they are started or not stopped.

But then, Americans retain the right to complain even if they don't vote.

And I retain the right to begrudge them that right, especially because I do vote! ;)

We will get who the majority wants, reflected by their vote.

If any of us chooses to share how we will use our vote especially if it is in a non-traditioinal means, others on this forum will probably comment upon it, especially if the vote is not used for either man running.

This is hot topics forum, that is what happens when discussing hot topics in this forum.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

brushworks said:
I have been saying that same thing about voting for evil. But when I say it some consider it offensive and attack my right to do so. Nothing new at HT.

No one attacked your right to say whatever you want.
However your OP here is extremely biased, misinformed and misleading. The facts are contrary to the headline of your OP, namely, Obama DID NOT OK any weapons to be used against protestors. To the contrary, every effort was made to insure that weapons transferred pursuant to our strategic alliance in that region would not be used against political protestors.

It is clear top me that your desire to see Obama defeated is paramount to you. In this instance that led you to jump on a negative headline without even understanding what the facts were behind it.

I suppose a retraction or an apology for posting this false and misleading thread is out of the question..


Here is a link that might be useful: Obama DID NOT OK any weapons to be used against protestors.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Mylab. Thank you for your reply. There are a myriad of reasons besides the war, the bombings, the droning, etc. I do not wish to participate in an election that will continue the downward spiral of this country. Thank you for respecting my right to vote for whomever I choose. It's my time to "not" be a part of the crowed that wins. Or should I say, loses whatever the result may be? :)

Heri and Maddie,

I respect your right to challenge the Democracy Now spokesperson and their video. I didn't produce it, I'm just passing it along. If you wish to contest it, their contact information is listed at the site.

Heri, You have no ground to stand on when accusing others of false claims.
You continue to state that Obama ended the Iraq war as he promised without acknowledging that it was designed to end on that day. Obama was actually trying to continue our stay in Iraq. Ask Kingturtle. He tutored you several times on it and you still don't get it.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

brush, you said on another thread that my vote for Obama would be a vote of submission.

You feel good about commenting on how I use my vote while challenging anything I say about how you use your vote?

Doesn't sound like you walk your talk.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

  • Posted by ohiomom 3rdrockfromthesun (My Page) on
    Thu, May 17, 12 at 7:38

Not leaving ... just dropping out of the going nowhere bitter battles of parties on this forum.

There are "occasionally" other things to talk about here LOL


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

I agree, Ohiomom... it does us no good to keep spinning wheels in the same mud puddle. I've already made up my mind on voting... and as the saying goes, you can't please all the people all the time. Certain things mean more to me than others, but I will do my duty as a citizen and vote.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Posted by chloe45 zone 61/2-7 (My Page) on
Wed, May 16, 12 at 16:02

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Guess this means nothing to you, Mrs and Demi.

We aren't all equal in your eyes are we??????????

*

Why in the WORLD would you call me out, and mrskjun, and make that assumption and ask that question, phrased that way?

Of course The Declaration of Independence is very important to me and means a great deal. Of course we are all created equal.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

lol demi, I figured chloe was just trolling. But her bait is just too old.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Yes, that bait all stinks.

Particularly one.

Rent Free, Baby!


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Thu, May 17, 12 at 10:08

I'm not voting for the lesser of 2 evils (there is no good or evil). I'll be voting for the lesser of 2 wrongs...and Obama is more right than Romney in that respect. Or for those of you who prefer, I'm voting for the better of 2 goods.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

If you feel that is so important to you then why do you vote against it??

Pocket book issues are really more important??
Tell that to my nephew who wrote on his Facebook page
"People tell me that not all Republicans put money ahead of my equal rights. I have yet to find one that doesn't believe that I should never have been born"


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Change wont start at the top-it starts at the bottom with the people you put in charge of your children and who you vote for in your city and county-stop just voting for people who promise to lower your property taxes no matter what and with time and patience you finally get people at the top who have some integrity-because that is how politicians get their start-with the school board and county commisioners. In the mean time we do not need a country that moves any farther to the right so you have to vote for the leftiest president you can find who has a chance in H#ll to get elected because you need to consider that the weakminded uber righties are just fine with the world ending since they are all going to heaven anyway.


 o
RE: Obama OK's Weapons Against Protesters

Chloe: "People tell me that not all Republicans put money ahead of my equal rights. I have yet to find one that doesn't believe that I should never have been born"

That doesn't sound right coming from Republicans, as a large number are pro-life? Wouldn't it be the pro-choice people who would have been for opting to end his life before he was born? Confusing.


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here