Bishop to Boycott Obama Commencement Speech
South Bend is heating up over the controversy surrounding Obama and the local bishop...Read the post2009 College Grads: We're the Lucky Ones
Why there is hope for the graduating Class of 2009, and how they can find work in a recession...Read the postBeer in Vending Machines -- What Drinking Age?
U.S. policies on drinking age seem restrictive when examining the rest of the world...Read the postHow The Press Can Remain Relevant
Is it any surprise that Obama has employed a strategy to cordon journalists that is similar to previous administrations?...Read the postBe Afraid, Cheney Warns. Be Very Afraid.
Just when you thought the Bush-era warnings of Armageddon around the corner were over, Cheney strikes again...Read the postObama: You Wouldn't Like Me When I'm Angry...
Obama threw down his stick, spat on the floor and growled in the face of cameras -- metaphorically... Read the postObama to GOP: 'I Won, I'm The President'
"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," Obama told GOP leaders...Read the postPalin Seeks $11M Book Deal, but Can She Read?
One can only imagine what Republican rising star Sarah Palin could possibly write about in her memoirs...Read the post
boston university
politics
Why Do Americans Oppose the Release of Information?
Matt Negin is now a contributor for The Cram, a student news arm of the newly launched PoliticsDaily.com. To follow his future work, click here.
In a new Washington Post poll, most Americans approve of Barack Obama's performance during his first 100 days in office.
But although the Post led its Sunday story with that finding, another response in the survey about the recently released torture memos is considerably more newsworthy. Apparently, 44 percent of the public disapproves of Obama's decision to release secret documents from the Bush administration detailing the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Fifty-three percent approved.
That key question also revealed a deep partisan divide, with three-quarters of Democrats backing the disclosure of the memos and just as many Republicans opposing the hotly debated move.
Why does access to more information fall along a partisan split? I was just as perplexed last year when I covered the Roger Clemens steroids-in-baseball hearing on Capitol Hill, and Democrats on the government reform committee harshly interrogated The Rocket while their Republican counterparts defended him. (I still can't figure out why, and Clemens has not been recorded by the FEC for any GOP campaign donations.)
But when did the issue of releasing information -- albeit from the secretive Bush administration about the sensitive issue of torture -- begin to irk conservatives? Shouldn't the availability of information be heralded by all, whether it be documents implicating a Democratic governor of New York in a prostitution ring or sexual instant messages between a Republican congressman from Florida and his congressional pages?
Whether the new information about counter-terrorist interrogations during Bush's term justifies the use of waterboarding or exposes a lack of understanding about torture methods, the very fact that the public can debate the use of torture with more understanding is valuable. Public debate without appropriate information is just yelling or pandering (or cable-news filler).
For example, one nugget from the torture memos released April 16 includes information (some in a footnote) about how simulated drowning, or "waterboarding," was used 266 times on two suspects. This news raised questions of not only waterboarding's effectiveness, but its frequent use. Advocates and critics of waterboarding can now understand better the controversial topic they're debating.
Yet even after that news has been reported, 44 percent of the public (mostly Republican but not all) still think it was a bad idea for Obama to make those documents available to be read by anyone, according to the Post poll. The question was not a matter of defending or criticizing the use of torture; it was, "Obama has ordered the release of previously secret records of Bush administration policies on the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Do you support or oppose Obama's decision to release these records?" Out of everyone asked, 32 percent "strongly oppose" the president's move, and another 12 percent "somewhat oppose" it.
One of the arguments against the memos' release is that potential suspects now have a wider view into counter-terrorist methods. (Still, fake drowning is fake drowning, whether you know it's coming or not.) And then there's the idea that because terrorists are potentially very dangerous, maybe the public doesn't want to know what it takes to get information that could help authorities prevent an attack.
These points appear to be valid, but certainly not partisan; nobody on Capitol Hill wants to make it easier for terrorists to strike. What they should want is the most information available to adequately serve public discourse.
In a new Washington Post poll, most Americans approve of Barack Obama's performance during his first 100 days in office.
But although the Post led its Sunday story with that finding, another response in the survey about the recently released torture memos is considerably more newsworthy. Apparently, 44 percent of the public disapproves of Obama's decision to release secret documents from the Bush administration detailing the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Fifty-three percent approved.
That key question also revealed a deep partisan divide, with three-quarters of Democrats backing the disclosure of the memos and just as many Republicans opposing the hotly debated move.
Why does access to more information fall along a partisan split? I was just as perplexed last year when I covered the Roger Clemens steroids-in-baseball hearing on Capitol Hill, and Democrats on the government reform committee harshly interrogated The Rocket while their Republican counterparts defended him. (I still can't figure out why, and Clemens has not been recorded by the FEC for any GOP campaign donations.)
But when did the issue of releasing information -- albeit from the secretive Bush administration about the sensitive issue of torture -- begin to irk conservatives? Shouldn't the availability of information be heralded by all, whether it be documents implicating a Democratic governor of New York in a prostitution ring or sexual instant messages between a Republican congressman from Florida and his congressional pages?
Whether the new information about counter-terrorist interrogations during Bush's term justifies the use of waterboarding or exposes a lack of understanding about torture methods, the very fact that the public can debate the use of torture with more understanding is valuable. Public debate without appropriate information is just yelling or pandering (or cable-news filler).
For example, one nugget from the torture memos released April 16 includes information (some in a footnote) about how simulated drowning, or "waterboarding," was used 266 times on two suspects. This news raised questions of not only waterboarding's effectiveness, but its frequent use. Advocates and critics of waterboarding can now understand better the controversial topic they're debating.
Yet even after that news has been reported, 44 percent of the public (mostly Republican but not all) still think it was a bad idea for Obama to make those documents available to be read by anyone, according to the Post poll. The question was not a matter of defending or criticizing the use of torture; it was, "Obama has ordered the release of previously secret records of Bush administration policies on the interrogation of terrorism suspects. Do you support or oppose Obama's decision to release these records?" Out of everyone asked, 32 percent "strongly oppose" the president's move, and another 12 percent "somewhat oppose" it.
One of the arguments against the memos' release is that potential suspects now have a wider view into counter-terrorist methods. (Still, fake drowning is fake drowning, whether you know it's coming or not.) And then there's the idea that because terrorists are potentially very dangerous, maybe the public doesn't want to know what it takes to get information that could help authorities prevent an attack.
These points appear to be valid, but certainly not partisan; nobody on Capitol Hill wants to make it easier for terrorists to strike. What they should want is the most information available to adequately serve public discourse.
Join The Discussion
Categories
Recent Comments »
Page 1/6
Post Your Comments Below
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Most Recent | Next 20 Comments
Cecil Jones
6:13PM 6:13PM Apr 26th 2009
America is a nation of laws, but we are also controlled by "Situational Ethics." In times of life and death, some believe survival trumps the Constitution. What we failed to examine is all the evidence leading up to the attack on 9-11 and all the mistakes and lies shared to present the event as a "Sneak Attack." What do all the mistakes and misrepresentations have to do with torture and the release of information? Integrity. The Bush administration lost it and we had to trust whatever they offered as truth in the interest of national security. Well, they are out of office and we have a duty to review the facts and defend the Constitution. Under attack, at war, or in times of peace and prosperity the laws matter. If we do not support the law, then we place our politics above the nation and that is always wrong. Democrats were just as guilty during the Clinton administration. He did have sex with that woman and he lied about it for nothing. What did we hide by not seeking the truth? Change is demanding the truth and accountability from all.
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
ettucat
11:55AM 11:55AM Apr 29th 2009
I take it you think Obama is truthful? He came up through Chicago politics. Nothing dirtier, nothing more dishonest. Whether you like it or not, you will be judged by the company you keep. President Bush had to make the decision to get information as fast as possible to preclude another attack. What hard decisions have you made in your life? Would you want someone to come back to you years later and, in hindsight, say you made the wrong decisions? Do you think they could possibly understand the circumstances that led you to your decision? Get real people. You leftists are so petty, so superficial in your analyses.
Rating :
Report!
longwalker
6:29PM 6:29PM Apr 26th 2009
Matt Negrin ; Republicans are not opposed to the release of information. We are opposed to the partial release of information. Information that has been "cherry-picked" so that only negative information is being released.
I am reminded of something that was published in a local airbase newspaper during WW II concerning the team standings at the end of the baseball season.
The paper noted that the officer's team came in second while the enlisted team finished next to last.
The full information, left out of the story, was that there were only two teams on that base. If you are a liberal, find a conservative to explain the catch.
The release by the Obama administration of selected classified information rather that the whole story is like that newspaper story. True as far as it goes but, since other information is being kept classified, the result is the same as a lie.
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Ex GOP Activist
4:40PM 4:40PM May 14th 2009
Your comments on the duplicity of the military show a great naivity.
You need to address the value of water boarding a man 183 times in 4 weeks or about 46 times a week, or about every 4 hours for a month. You are worrying about being embarassed about the vile actions of your government and how to keep it secret. Too late! The world knows and the best we can do now is stop pretending,face the facts, and see that the US never ever acts so cowardly and with such dishonor again.
Rating :
Report!
COWBOY
4:18PM 4:18PM Apr 28th 2009
HAVE TO AGREE WILL WE BE GIVEN ALL FACTS OR CHERRY PICKED INFORMATION AND WHO IS QUALIFIED TO READ THE ENTIRE REPORTS AND DOCUMENT RESPONSIBLE? OBAMA, I DON'T THINK SO HE CAN'T EVEN BE HONEST AND REVEAL HIS SEALED BIRTH CERTIFICATE AND EDUCATIONAL DEMOCRATIC.
I AM NOT TRYING TO BEAT A DIED HORSE BUT THESE ARE FACTS AND SHOULD BE TAKEN AS SERIOUSLY AS THE INFORMATION THAT WOULD NOT MAKE HIM QUALIFIED, EXPERIENCED OR HONEST ENOUGH TO BE OUR PRESIDENT AND "COMMONER AND CHIEF!" SO, MY QUESTION IS STILL WHO CAN BE TRUSTED? THIS IS JUST ANOTHER WAY TO TAKE THE FOCUS OFF OBAMA'S CONDUCTED IN REPRESENTING OUR COUNTRY TO OTHER AND THE JOKE ON HIS SUPPORTIVE THAT THOUGHT HE COULD KEEP HIS PROMISES. MOST RECENTLY TRYING TO SOLVE DECADES OF RELATION WITH CASTRO IN ONE DAY, HOW EMBARRASSING TO MAKE OUR COUNTRY LOOK SO WEAK! FUNNY THING IS THE LIES HE TOLD DURING CAMPAIGNING FOR PRESIDENT THE MEDIA IS GETTING HIM OUT OF CRITICAL DAMAGE HE ALREADY MADE i.e. the people he choices to be in his administration TAX FRAUDS (4) 1 OF WHICH THE DEMOCRAT CONGRESS APPROVED TO BE OUR "TREASURE OF SECRETARY" AND INVOLVED IN THE "AIG' BOUNCES GIVEN TO THEIR TOP EXECUTES, GOV OF ILLINOIS IMPEACHED BECAUSE HE TRIED TO SALE OBAMS SENATE SEAT.
GOV. MEXICO ROD RICHARDS WHO WAS BEING INVESTIGATED BY A GRAND JURY FOR ILLEGAL CONTRACTS. PLEASE DON'T GIVE YOUR ENTIRE ATTENTION TO THESE REPORTS CAUSE I GUARANTEE HE KEEP MAKING MORE CRITICAL PROBLEMS TO OUR COUNTRY THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICAN.
Rating :
Report!
ettucat
11:59AM 11:59AM Apr 29th 2009
Exactly. Release all the information, get all persons who were briefed, bring them before a panel of "independent" judges, swear them in, and let the chips fall. Pelosi is a lying, senile snake who should have been booted out a long time ago. The only crime committed by President Bush was to keep us from another attack, which, if we were lucky, would have found a far left stronghold to target.
Rating :
Report!
falling
9:08AM 9:08AM May 2nd 2009
Ex GOP Activist.....you have a serious deficit of knowledge...read the memo...these men were NOT waterboarded 46 times a week! In fact, the Negrin showed his own partisanship by not telling you that these men could only be interrogated 5 days out of 30, never more than 2 days in a row and could be waterboarded no more than 12 minutes at a time, with each "pour" from the bucket counting as ONE incident of waterboarding...doesn't look quite as extreme as you and Negrin would like us to believe does it. And BTW, each pour could be between 10 and 40 seconds long with no more than ONE longer pour per 12 minute session. Given the WHOLE truth makes a BIG difference! BTW, when thrown against the flexible "sound" amplifying wall, the prison had to wear a neckbrace and when confronted with the dreaded catapillar, the prisoner had to be told it could not sting him! And a doctor had to be standing by at all times to insure the prisoners safety.
Obama has given extremely valuable information to our enemies..and with that information he has weakened our CIA and our military. He has given our enemies comfort and aided them in their understand of exactly how weak we are...and ensured them that we will be much weaker in the future! I believe there is a word in our constitution that clearly defines those who give aid and comfort to our enemies!
Rating :
Report!
dennis higgins
6:40PM 6:40PM Apr 26th 2009
44% don't want information released? Don't care! Need to know who NOT to vote for in future elections. Don't want torture to become an American way of life so Dems and Repubs that signed should be voted out.
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
SPacificGrove
8:19PM 8:19PM Apr 27th 2009
Most Americans don't want to know the truth about torture because they don't want to believe that THEIR government (Bush & Co) was capable of doing such vile and despicable acts....Its that simple......
Rating :
Report!
remartantiques
7:55PM 7:55PM Apr 26th 2009
Why do Americans oppose......?
1) Wash our dirty clothes in public, even if they're not really dirty? A lot of us believe enhanced interrogations are OK given the stakes, and given the cautions of the procedures. Our troops are said to go through some of these interrogations for training, and the terrorists seem to survive multiple immersions, can't be too fatal.
2) Give information to the enemy - even if certain elements have put it already into certain newspapers.
3) It politicizes a national security issue.....do I believe Holden is not going to politicize policy.....har! The Democrats use it to bash the Republicans, along with all their other Politically Correct insanity. Yes, I'm one of those "PC is killing America" types.
4) It amuses the enemy.....they must think we're such wimpy twits. They sure don't mince their words or pull out their memos to quell their outraged public, do they? Their public seems afraid to open their mouths, if they're not in outright agreement with the haters.
5) It confuses Americans: Was Pelosi or was she not briefed? Is she or is she not a liar?
6) It serves no useful purpose!!! If the liberals are so concerned about the morality of using enhanced interrogations, the subject sure has the attention and they sure have the seats to pursue it's future application. Why continue to muddy the waters and raise the contention bar about past applications EXCEPT for political, not patriotic, purposes?
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
T. Hurst
4:07PM 4:07PM Apr 27th 2009
lol...because if we don't, they will think us wimpy? You've got to be kidding or you are a teenage boy. All legitimate evidence proves that any sort of torture NEVER works. Never. Even if it did. The small amount of info you would receive, even if it did save a couple of lives, would exponicially cause America more lives by the hate and bad PR that it would cause. We are America, We do not torture.
Rating :
Report!
Gregory Dittmer
5:46PM 5:46PM Apr 27th 2009
remartantiques
7:55PM 7:55PM Apr 26th 2009
Why continue to muddy the waters and raise the contention bar about past applications EXCEPT for political, not patriotic, purposes?
####################################################
Most of what you have written seemed to make sense even if I don't agree with it... but then you had to spoil it by adding those few last lines!
You claim we "continue to muddy the waters and raise the contention bar about past applications," would you have us investigate possible crimes in the FUTURE?! The only way to get to the bottom of the issue is to look at what WAS done, NOT what WILL be done!
Bill Clinton got oral sex from Monika Lewinsky. It really had NOTHING to do with his job as POTUS. It had no effect on policy or national security. ALL it was is the fact he cheated on Hillary... nothing more, nothing less!
However, the Republicans in Congress could not let the irrelevant past remain in the past. When Ken Starr was appointed it was to look into possible wrong doing in the so-called Whitewater Scandal. When he got done, there was nothing found to be able to prosecute the Clintons, but that didn't stop Ken and the Republicans. After YEARS of being under the micoscope and millions of tax dollars, the ONLY thing Starr could find was Clinton lied under oath about having an affair!
Now try to spin that into something other than political assination which had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with Clinton's job as POTUS.
Investgation of past CRIMINAL events perpetrated by Bush43 and/or his Administration is NOT politically driven. It is a possible CRIMINAL act against humanity perpetrated by Bush43 and HIS team! Regardless of what your personal view, this Nation helped write and then ratified an international treaty against torture. Furthermore, it was spelled out quite specifically WHAT constitutes torture. Virtually EVERY act of "enhanced interrogation" is considered torture in that document!
Between giving the okay to torture and the stated motivation for invading Iraq are against the laws WE wrote and used to justify executions. According to OUR OWN wording, the Bush43 administration has broken virtually EVERY aspect of EVERY International treaty which labels the events "crimes against humanity."
If it was worth spending years and millions of dollars investigating EVERY aspect of Bill Clinton and then actually pursuing prosecution, it is IMPERATIVE that we, as a Nation, investigate the questionable actions of Bush43 and his entire administration! For the good name and international standing of this Nation, we MUST investigate and prosecute wrong doing!
Rating :
Report!
remartantiques
6:08PM 6:08PM Apr 27th 2009
T Hurst ~ Please read again, starting with #1. I'm not a teenager and you need a better take on how weak the enemy thinks we are. There has already been plenty of news as to how these enhanced interrogations have prevented other attacks, so as to value received,
"it might have saved a couple of lives" THESE are American lives being saved, and Politically Incorrect as I am, I value our lives more than their lives. So don't think of it as torture, think of it as enhanced interrogration. Just like they're no longer
"enemy combatants", they're just "detainees". A masterstroke of muddying the waters, more political correctness to misguide us. This is ALL partisan politics, that's what's going on here. And perhaps a naive world view.
Rating :
Report!
remartantiques
6:18PM 6:18PM Apr 27th 2009
T Hurst ~ Please read again, starting with #1. I'm not a teenager
and you need a better take on how weak the enemy thinks we are.
There has already been plenty of news as to how these enhanced
interrogations have prevented other attacks, so as to value received,
"it might have saved a couple of lives" THESE are American lives
being saved, and Politically Incorrect as I am, I value our lives
more than their lives. So don't think of it as torture, think of it
as enhanced interrogration. Just like they're no longer
"enemy combatants", they're just "detainees". A masterstroke of
muddying the waters, even while being semantically correct. This
is ALL about partisan politics, that's what's going on here. And perhaps a naive world view.
Rating :
Report!
remartantiques
7:35PM 7:35PM Apr 27th 2009
Reply to Gregory:
You give me lots to think about.
No, I would not have us investigating future crimes, this is not about some Tom Cruise movie. What I said was aimed towards clarifying the subject as a basis for future investigation, rather than “changing the rules in the middle of the game type investigations” as we seem to have now. We are told Bush had his lawyers and the subject was run by the likes of Pelosi and other Democrats, so Bush had his Congressional and Senatorial disclosures. We are told that some American troops undergo waterboarding for training, and that “Detainees” (formerly “enemy combatants”) have been waterboarded over a hundred times, so this torture is decidedly non-lethal. We have one side telling us these procedures have been reviewed and approved, we have another side ever so quick to throw out the “torture” word. I have not seen anything yet other than your words that every “enhanced interrogation” technique we use defined as torture in a treaty we signed. Give me a link to research, but not “moveon” or such, rather something I can believe. Really, we signed a treaty that said we can’t put bugs on “detainees”? So it seems we already have muddy and contentious waters, no need to make them moreso. What is needed is some clarity. And if to pursue a crime, first establish a crime has been committed, then go after it, as opposed to this Crime and Court by media. I know the far left is frothing to go to court, and as usual they don’t much care how they hurt the country while the entire time protesting they do it for the country. So if you want to accuse me that the ends justifies the means, so accuse, I admit my guilt. I’d just rather err to the side of American lives than “detainee” comforts.
And if you put me in a room discussing enemy and American tactics, I think I’m going to be a little more focused on those decapitations
and utter disregard for civilians than I am with these enhanced questionings. I’m strange that way, wondering why so many Americans spend more time ranting about our behaviors than their behaviors. I know we’re supposed to be on a higher level, but from what I see, we ARE on a higher level. Granted, it needs ever to be higher, and we need to be vigilant.
And the bottom line? It’s WAR. So many Americans don’t really fathom that, just don’t get it at all.
Re: Your mention of Bill Clinton/oral sex, nothing to do with job as POTUS (speaking of pot, he said he never inhaled…..did you believe that one?): I say as President his responsibility to exhibit moral leadership had everything to do with the job. Now we have teenagers getting STDs without ever “really having sex” because they only did “that Clinton thing”.
And they didn’t call him Slick Willie and Teflon Bill for no cause. There was far more than Whitewater and Monica - and Paula Jones, and who were those other ladies, and the cops procuring for him while Governor? The litany goes on, the scandal that the Clintons bought to America were only exceeded by America’s quick ability to quickly forget. I like the quote “He promised so much, delivered so little, and embarrassed everyone.” So you see, I think of it as more than just a little cheating on Hillary. But then she’s had to put up with it for a lifetime, he’s got the worse case ever of “the presidential disease”.
The “Only” thing Starr could find was Clinton lied under oath????
Hey, in the real world, people can go to prison for that. Character Assassination? Hell, Clinton needed no help for that, he was always his own worst enemy.
I always thought the Clinton Motto should be “Duping America, it’s What We Do Best!” but that’s another story.
For bipartisanship, I hardly believe everything Bush did was on the up and up either, from Iraq to the Southwest border, not to mention those giveaways (bailouts) he started.
The way you go on about Bush and his, sounds like a witchhunt to me, but I would agree that many liberals thought Starr and others were witchhunting the Clintons. And, sure enough, they found a wicked witch in the west wing. (Sorry about that….)
I really get tired of how some of those liberals seem to define themselves in terms of Bush……as if, because Bush did it, it’s OK for us to (the bailouts), or their seeming determination to go to the grave trying to defame Bush. That‘s history, let the historians sort it out. About the only good thing I can say about Bush is he helped prevent more attacks. And so did enhanced interrogations.
Ps: When Obama’s cabinet picks began being so afflicted by tax crimes and other problems, I told friends that this isn’t just a
Democrat curse, I’d bet many the Republicans would be equally culpable. Most of all I want the truth……I try to decide that as best I can, guided by my own sense of values but trying to be open minded while I know I’m biased. It’s just so difficult these days, with so much input, a little right and so much wrong, with so many shades in between. “We both have truths, are mine the same as yours?” One truth I know follows.
In conclusion, let’s be bipartisan and admit, BOTH PARTIES SUCK ! It’s the human condition.
Rating :
Report!
FireEagle
10:20AM 10:20AM Apr 28th 2009
remartantiques,
I agree with almost every thing you said. You said it very well. I am hoping there are more of us.
you ought to read "Liberty and Tyranny: a conservative manifesto" by Mark Levin. It is truly a great book, and it tracks how our society has started its climb to socialism in 1922, the New Deal under FDR and has skyrocketed under Obama.
From an email that I received. CATCHING PIGS
THIS IS TRULY THOUGHT PROVOKING. TAKE THE TIME TO READ IT AND SEND IT ON TO THOSE THAT YOU THINK ARE WORTH SENDING TO.
There was a chemistry professor in a large college that had some exchange students in the class. One day while the class was in the lab, the Prof noticed one young man, an exchange student, who kept rubbing his back and stretching as if his back hurt.
The professor asked the young man what was the matter. The student told him he had a bullet lodged in his back. He had been shot while fighting communists in his native country who were trying to overthrow his country's government and install a new communist regime.
In the midst of his story, he looked at the professor and asked a strange question.. He asked:
'Do you know how to catch wild pigs?'
The professor thought it was a joke and asked for the punch line. The young man said that it was no joke.
'You catch wild pigs by finding a suitable place in the woods and putting corn on the ground. The pigs find it and begin to come everyday to eat the free corn. When they are used to coming every day, you put a fence down one side of the place where they are used to coming.
When they get used to the fence, they begin to eat the corn again and you put up another side of the fence. They get used to that and start to eat again. You continue until you have all four sides of the fence up with a gate in the last side.
The pigs, which are used to the free corn, start to come through the gate to eat that free corn again.
You then slam the gate on them and catch the whole herd... Suddenly the wild pigs have lost their freedom. They run around and around inside the fence, but they are caught.
Soon they go back to eating the free corn . They are so used to it that they have forgotten how to forage in the woods for themselves, so they accept their captivity.'
The young man then told the professor that is exactly what he sees happening in America . The government keeps pushing us toward Communism/Socialism and keeps spreading the free corn out in the form of programs such as supplemental income, tax credit for unearned income, tax cuts, tax exemptions, tobacco subsidies, dairy subsidies, payments not to plant crops (CRP), welfare, medicine, drugs, etc. while we continually lose our freedoms, just a little at a time.
One should always remember two truths:
1) There is no such thing as a free lunch
2) and you can never hire someone to provide a service for you cheaper than you can do it yourself.
If you see that all of this wonderful government 'help' is a problem confronting the future of democracy in America , you might want to send this on to your friends.
If you think the free ride is essential to your way of life, then you will probably delete this email.
But God help you when the gate slams shut!
Rating :
Report!
Jim
7:42PM 7:42PM Apr 29th 2009
What don't you get about it not mattering if you or others think torture is okay? It is against our laws. Your opinion does not change that. Nor do folks thinking murder or child molestation are okay make it okay. What an idiot!
Rating :
Report!
remartantiques
11:22AM 11:22AM Apr 30th 2009
Jim ~ re: Torture, Law:
Sorry, I've seen so much conflicting testimony and opinion, but don't recall seeing any substantive declaration that enhanced interrogations are against the law. Could you link me to that, please? I see where some interpret it as against the law, but also see that it's been duly reported to Congress. In the meantime I'll look upon it as a grey area, many of us will take it as acceptable, many of us won't. It is illegal for immigrants to cross our borders without processing into the country, yet millions have done it, with far greater impacts than this enhanced torture, but I see few getting their knickers in an uproar about that, and many in power condoning it. I guess this is a "we're better than that, and I need a cheap housecleaner" contradiction.
Rating :
Report!
jim
8:22PM 8:22PM Apr 26th 2009
its funny that our enemys can behead us, iight our bodies on fire and then drag us through the streets, but there are people in this country that worry and feel sorry for our enemies. i think these people obviously do not have sons, brothers, fathers, daughters, or even mothers defending our country. I say to hell with these people who are more concerned with our enemys rights than ours including the socialist obama.
Rating :
Reply to this commentReport!
Ex GOP Activist
4:41PM 4:41PM May 14th 2009
Are you what America has come to? You seem to idolize the arrogant, strutting bully of the last 8 years. I used to think that America set its own vaules and held honor to be a cornerstone. So now we have become a "rogue nation" who is free to lie, break treaty, torture, create bogus wars, et al. and follow the example of the world's more primitive, uneducated scum. What horrid cowards you are to sell your birthright out of your pitiful fear for your own well being. You repulse me!
Rating :
Report!
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | Most Recent | Next 20 Comments