Indefinite Detention? But I Have Soccer Practice at 4: U.S. Politics 2012

Rich man/government teat types are a really audaciously blinders-on sort of crew. As mentioned before by myself and others, Obama gets shit for going on vacation, including to placed like Hawaii, where he was (allegedly!) born, but he needs to go somewhere because unlike Bush, or Reagan or Romney he is not independently wealthy and owner of a family homestead or retreat. And before that you had someone like John McCain, who is not only also independently wealthy, but has literally been living off the government from the moment of his birth on.

I'm not sure why folks like Obama pussyfoot around this stuff. Bring on the class warfare, I say.

tombot's right of course: one must either object to the entirety of the country's foriegn policy ("domestic progressives", lol) or unquestioningly assent to its every aspect (tombot). there's no in-between

how does that old saying go? to a guy who supported the iraq war, every problem looks like an iraq war. or something

ah, CIVILIZATION.

snarkin' on, like Jesus would.

apparently there's a cover article in Foreign Affairs arguing to let Iran have nukes, bcz every nation that's gotten them has started to behave more responsibly? I can assent to that. We don't need no fuckin' land war.

(also we shouldn't have shit to say about nukes, EVER #harrystruman)

Rich man/government teat types are a really audaciously blinders-on sort of crew. As mentioned before by myself and others, Obama gets shit for going on vacation, including to placed like Hawaii, where he was (allegedly!) born, but he needs to go somewhere because unlike Bush, or Reagan or Romney he is not independently wealthy and owner of a family homestead or retreat. And before that you had someone like John McCain, who is not only also independently wealthy, but has literally been living off the government from the moment of his birth on.

I'm not sure why folks like Obama pussyfoot around this stuff. Bring on the class warfare, I say.

one reason ... many of the people who go off on government spending for The Poors whilst they themselves have been the beneficiaries of government largesse are military veterans. McCain is the most obvious example, but this includes your friendly neighborhood Teabag who served in, say, the OG Persian Gulf War and who now shouts his belief that "Obama = Hitler" when he isn't cashing his VA disability check.

attacking military veterans, or their benefits/preferences in hiring/etc., is tantamount to defending child molesters or killing kittens.

i.e, the Teatard military veteran "earned his benefits and privileges." those lazy shiftless layabouts on welfare/unemployment/Obamacare haven't. or so that's the mindset.

Watching Bob Schieffer on Face the Nation trot out the usual blame both sides and why can't they get together arguments. Ugh. At least Robert Reich was on there. Now Schieffer is denying he's part of the Romney campaign because they are using footage of he and David Brooks in an ad about how Obama is just Mr. Negative

I started watching a segment of Meet the Press but Grover Norquist was there and I can't handle that.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/disclose-act-new-donor-transparency-law-blocked-in-senate/2012/07/16/gJQAbm7WpW_blog.html

The Senate has failed to advance legislation that would require independent groups to disclose the names of contributors who give more than $10,000 for use in political campaigns.

The measure, known as the DISCLOSE Act, died in a 51 to 44 vote on a procedural motion. It needed 60 votes to move forward.

bcz every nation that's gotten them has started to behave more responsibly?

lol

you mean like Israel? or North Korea? Pakistan?

Republicans say the measure could have a chilling affect on political giving, subjecting campaign donors to intimidation from their political opponents.

The bill is a response to the 2010 Citizens United ruling, in which the U.S. Supreme Court said that corporate campaign donations are a form of free speech and cannot be limited by government. Some nonprofit groups and unions are not required to reveal their donors. The bill would require speedy disclosure of big donors.

Intimidation, huh?

if you can imagine having a clue about the nature of siege warfare, or trench warfare, or any other kind of warfare that involves thousands of people and famine and pestilence, as it has for millenia, then this kind of warfare - 3am helicopters, robot assassinations, and self-destructing computer code - should be recognized for what it is - the most civilized form of war that this species has ever seen.

tombototm

fwiw I still don't like it, but it's better than firebombing Tokyo

ugh

v easy to say when you're not on the receiving end of a pushed button

i think we're having a means-ends disagreement here tom...

v easy to say when you're not on the receiving end of a pushed button

tmi

automated warfare: so fresh, so clean.

Republicans say the measure could have a chilling affect on political giving, subjecting campaign donors to intimidation from their political opponents.

Wasn't this argument explicitly rejected by the Supreme Court in regards to the California Prop. 8 donors?

the important thing about it is that less people die. that is all. that you can't see that as an improvement is weird.

xp

not good enough

and fwiw one person dead is still too many afaic. but 10 dead people /= 10,000 dead people.

xp

being a "less"/"fewer" pedant is total hell

imagine teaching the diff between "amount" and "number" to twenty year olds.

DJP that's why you should be in favor of more death and more dead, it's just simpler

I agree Shakey but I'm more and more appalled by the distance it gives us from the killing and the way it no longer implicates us since we're no longer sending our sons to do it on the ground but I guess people probably felt that way when the first jawbone or javelin was used instead of strangling or pummeling to death with your fists.

being a "less"/"fewer" pedant is total hell

being a "less"/"fewer" pedant is total hell

― PITILESS LIVE SHOW (DJP), Tuesday, July 17, 2012 9:09 AM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

hurts me a thousand times more than any other solecism

So are only choices are isolationism or the Prez looking at "terrorist baseball cards" and ordering a button pushed with no due process? I don't think so. Never gonna hapopen because Congress won't do it, but an expanded FISA Court that would rule on drone usage could be a middle ground.

MW otm

and many of the "ten" HAHA ppl we are killing have fucknothing to do with "keeping us safe" or whatever bullshit is being spouted by Panetta & Co.

but I guess people probably felt that way when the first jawbone or javelin was used instead of strangling or pummeling to death with your fists.

naw dude this is how MEN beef

we should really stop killing HAHA ppl

if one death is a tragedy + a million is a statistic, it's a good thing that in modern society we're mostly dealing with tragedies and not statistics!

if you can't see the fucking hilarity in these arguments, Dr Strngelove sux

the firebombing of tokyo took place during a war, with armies and an ending; it was a Total War yes that was not confined to battlefields and militaries (i read a funny [if you have a sick sense of humor] statistic the other day about the relative intactness of postwar european industry -- factories and mines and so on -- on a continent with an apocalyptically devastated civilian population) but at least it was not an endless global militarized police action with no boundaries or uniforms under which even citizens of the policing country can be declared enemy combatants and executed by extrajudicial robots for things they exhorted people to do on the internet. this is not a war; it is a permanent order. nothing to be done of course so whatever but it's fair to find it creepy and unacceptable for a country that supposedly treats the rule of law and the citizen's inalienable rights as holy, and SHUT UP THIS IS THE MOST CIVILIZED WE'VE EVER BEEN is only a hair away from IF YOU'VE DONE NOTHING WRONG YOU HAVE NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT.

it's fair to find it creepy and unacceptable for a country that supposedly treats the rule of law and the citizen's inalienable rights as holy

I would hope it's clear that I do find it creepy and unacceptable

excellent use of brackets!

those two sentiments are completely unrelated afaict except that you wrote them both in caps? xxp

i believe they both relate to CRUSHING DISSENT

you forgot "except for THE FACT THAT" etc

xxp i was mostly talking to tombot

i think the two sentiments have a similar "what's with your high standards why do you think this is a problem" foundation

plus yes as others have pointed out the little call of duty muppets sitting in their comfy chairs remotely bug-splatting brown people is probably even worse for the soul than everything else we do

i think you can simultaneously appreciate that we live in one of the most civilized peaceful times in history (cf Pinker's recent book) and think that we should protest the things that are still wrong + immoral. that's why the sentiments are unrelated.

lol Morbz doesn't have high standards he has some sort hysterical hyperbole disorder

xp

where i fall out w/ ilx leftism completely is that i suspect some of those wrong + immoral things have a causal relationship w/ the 'most civilized peaceful time in history' part.

but no need to yell at me about it. i already know what [collective] u think about it.

naw dude this is how MEN beef

Humans, otoh, use whatever they can including crossbows, poison, nuclear bombs, and iTunes.

The 'SHUT UP' part of the first sentiment is not unimportant, I think.

no, Mordy, I think we're aware of these Ironies of History but still think they're disgusting