Obama's Insensitivity Following Shooting

[JimR-OCDS]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='06 November 2009 - 04:57 PM' timestamp='1257541022' post='1997325']
Yes he does.
[/quote]


Prove it


Jim

[Lil Red]

+J.M.J.+
moving to debate table.

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 04:00 PM' timestamp='1257541211' post='1997327']
Prove it


Jim
[/quote]

why dont' you prove he doesn't?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 05:00 PM' timestamp='1257541211' post='1997327']
Prove it


Jim
[/quote]
Obama for Infanticide.
3x he voted against the Infant Born Alive Act.
http://www.nrlc.org/News_and_Views/Aug08/nv081108part2.html

[dominicansoul]

[quote name='JimR-OCDS' date='06 November 2009 - 03:56 PM' timestamp='1257540963' post='1997322']
He does't support infanticide, but thats a different subject.


Jim
[/quote]

I'm not trying to "change the subject" but the subject at hand is that he showed "insensitivity" at the news of the massacre at Ft. Hood. My point is that since he is extremely insensitive to the life in the womb, why would he give a flip about soldiers getting massacred by one of their own?

He shows total indifference to me...except when it comes to his own aggrandizement.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='06 November 2009 - 05:18 PM' timestamp='1257542302' post='1997334']
I'm not trying to "change the subject" but the subject at hand is that he showed "insensitivity" at the news of the massacre at Ft. Hood. My point is that since he is extremely insensitive to the life in the womb, why would he give a flip about soldiers getting massacred by one of their own?

He shows total indifference to me...except when it comes to his own aggrandizement.
[/quote]
Mea culpa!

[Saint Therese]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='06 November 2009 - 01:36 PM' timestamp='1257532581' post='1997203']
Like many of Obama's actions, he does not carry the demeanor and decorum required of the president of this country. You could tell he was simply saying what was expected of him and had no real interest in the event. 90% of what was said was not words.
[/quote]

I agree. I think he couldn't have cared less.


[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 01:49 PM' timestamp='1257533374' post='1997216']
Every little mistake brings him that much closer to not being in office anymore.
[/quote]



[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='06 November 2009 - 03:57 PM' timestamp='1257541022' post='1997325']
Yes he does.[/quote]

Indeed he does. I've never understood how voters can trust a politician who is in favor of killing a large portion of the popoulace.

[CatherineM]

I'd think it would be very hard to know what to say. I do remember watching Ronald Reagan and his wife honor our Marines who were killed in Lebanon. It wasn't just his words, it was his actions.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='CatherineM' date='06 November 2009 - 06:04 PM' timestamp='1257552266' post='1997391']
I'd think it would be very hard to know what to say. I do remember watching Ronald Reagan and his wife honor our Marines who were killed in Lebanon. It wasn't just his words, it was his actions.
[/quote]
I agree. Even a few moments of silence would have been appropriate. No need to say anything. Sometimes words aren't adequate anyway.
I find the minutes of silence on Remembrance Day particularly moving for that reason.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 09:13 PM' timestamp='1257556421' post='1997413']
I agree. Even a few moments of silence would have been appropriate. No need to say anything. Sometimes words aren't adequate anyway.
I find the minutes of silence on Remembrance Day particularly moving for that reason.
[/quote]

Here is something for Remembrance Day.

[url="http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig/twain1.html"]The War Prayer, by Mark Twain[/url]


[url="http://www.theonion.com/content/opinion/im_prepared_to_give_my_life_for"]I'm Prepared To Give My Life for This Country, or Any Country[/url]


[url="http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig8/davis-d1.html"]An Ancient Mandate For National Security: Political Reporage from the 11th Century, B.C.[/url]

[url="http://www.lewrockwell.com/hornberger/hornberger64.html"]The Troops Don't Defend Our Freedoms, by Jacob Hornberger. [/url]

[font="Verdana"][size="2"]To cite James Madison in the last article, "[/size][/font][font="Verdana"][size="2"]A standing military force, with an overgrown Executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defense against foreign danger have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people."

And Patrick Henry, who "smelled a rat," had this to say: "[/size][/font][font="Times New Roman, Times, serif"][size="3"][font="Verdana"][size="2"]A standing army we shall have, also, to execute the execrable commands of tyranny; and how are you to punish them? Will you order them to be punished? Who shall obey these orders? Will your mace-bearer be a match for a disciplined regiment?"

~Sternhauser[/size][/font]
[/size][/font]

Edited November 7, 2009 by Sternhauser

[Nihil Obstat]

I like In Flanders Fields.

In Flanders Fields
By: Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (1872-1918)
Canadian Army
In Flanders Fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 10:26 PM' timestamp='1257560797' post='1997442']
I like In Flanders Fields.

"Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields."
[/quote]

I don't like the poem. Its main message is, "We couldn't kill them all, so pick up where we left off." It promotes the idea (which most people who have seen the senselessness of war regrettably believe) that dying in a muddy, rat-infested trench for no good reason while trying to kill people who never threatened you is an act that has some intrinsically noble and sanctifying properties.

~Sternhauser

Edited November 7, 2009 by Sternhauser

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='06 November 2009 - 08:33 PM' timestamp='1257561219' post='1997459']
I don't like the poem. Its main message is, "We couldn't kill them all, so pick up where we left off." As if dying in a muddy, rat-infested trench for no good reason had some intrinsically noble, sanctifying properties.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
I disagree. I see it as honouring those who died for what they believed in, and telling the next generation that their sacrifice should not be in vain.

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 10:39 PM' timestamp='1257561543' post='1997465']
I disagree. I see it as honouring those who died for what they believed in, and telling the next generation that their sacrifice should not be in vain.
[/quote]

Sacrifice? What does "sacrifice" mean? It means "to make holy." What are soldiers making holy by slaughtering other men, something they would never have done had a State not told them to?

Dying for what you believe in is as honorable as your belief is true and your intellect and will are prudent and properly ordered.

The Muslims who slaughtered innocents on 9/11 died for what they believed in. They very likely had a noble intention and a sincere will. But what they did was not good. Nor was it conducive to their ultimately-desired ends.

Dying in a war does not make you a hero. It does not make you an instant saint. It makes you a victim.

~Sternhauser

Edited November 7, 2009 by Sternhauser

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='Sternhauser' date='06 November 2009 - 08:45 PM' timestamp='1257561907' post='1997475']
Sacrifice? What does "sacrifice" mean? It means "to make holy." What are soldiers making holy by slaughtering other men, something they would never have done had a State not told them to?

Dying for what you believe in is as honorable as your belief is true and your intellect and will are prudent and properly ordered.

The Muslims who slaughtered innocents on 9/11 died for what they believed in. They very likely had a noble intention and a sincere will. But what they did was not good. Nor was it conducive to their ultimately-desired ends.

Dying in a war does not make you a hero. It does not make you an instant saint. It makes you a victim.

~Sternhauser
[/quote]
So what it comes down to for you, is whether or not they worked for a worthwhile cause, am I right? It's not the dying that's worthwhile, it's what they put into it. Am I correct in saying that? I'm not saying there's inherent value in dying, but there is inherent value in being willing to die for an objectively good cause. Clearly these men were willing, because they did.

So you'd have to ask yourself whether or not World War One was a worthy cause or not. Who attacked whom and for what reasons? Was meeting the attack with force justified? The war certainly wasn't glorious. It was disgusting and horrible, but was it necessary?

[CatherineM]

I got to meet someone at the Canadian Legion whose grandfather was on one of the troop transports my father's squadron kept from being sent to the bottom of the Atlantic by a German U-Boat. He was appreciative of my dad's sacrifice.

[Lounge Daddy]

[url="http://newsbusters.org/blogs/mike-bates/2009/11/06/obama-gives-shout-out-congressional-medal-honor-winner-who-isnt"][b]Obama Gives Shout Out to 'Congressional Medal of Honor Winner' Who Isn't[/b][/url]

[url="http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/politics/A-Disconnected-President.html"][b]Obama's Frightening Insensitivity Following Shooting [/b][/url]

[Sternhauser]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='06 November 2009 - 10:49 PM' timestamp='1257562179' post='1997480']
So what it comes down to for you, is whether or not they worked for a worthwhile cause, am I right? It's not the dying that's worthwhile, it's what they put into it. Am I correct in saying that? I'm not saying there's inherent value in dying, but there is inherent value in being willing to die for an objectively good cause. Clearly these men were willing, because they did.

So you'd have to ask yourself whether or not World War One was a worthy cause or not. Who attacked whom and for what reasons? Was meeting the attack with force justified? The war certainly wasn't glorious. It was disgusting and horrible, but was it necessary?
[/quote]

They were so willing to go and fight and die that over two million men had to be enslaved to fight in World War One, under threat of imprisonment, and death, if they resisted imprisonment. Tell me how conscription differs from slavery.

War is almost [i]always[/i] founded on a lie.

The State told us that Santa Anna made an unwarranted attacked on United State troops in Tejas. It was a lie. (The State also didn't tell us that the United State offered to reinstall Santa Anna, and to give him a handsome sum to be its own puppet dictator.)

The State told us that "Lincoln and the Army of the Lord was marchin' down to free the slaves, alleluia," and not going to war to secure taxes from those who dared believe in the Constitution of 1792. To force a "Union" made at gunpoint.

The State told us that the Spanish were continuing to commit atrocities in Cuba, and that those dastardly Spanish blew up the U.S. Battleship Maine. (Remember the Maine!) Who cares? Those who stood to profit by promoting the lie-based war got what they wanted.

The State repeated the lie that the baby-butchering, maiden-ravishing bloody-handed Huns were ravaging Belgium, and didn't tell us that in addition to a few civilians, the Lusitania was mainly carrying small arms and ammunition to the British. But that's all right. It was useful. A propaganda poster of a beautiful blonde woman drowning underwater with a baby in her arms literally caused riots on the streets of Boston. The people demanded war. A nice emotional plea to get people to soberly consider the ramifications of war. It worked for those in power who stood to turn a buck.

The State told us that the U.S. was taken completely off guard on December 7th, 1941. The media failed to mention that the Dutch and Americans had broken the Japanese code. The State failed to mention that since 1933, every final exam in the Imperial Naval Academy included the question, "How would you execute a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor?" I personally own a letter written by a paratrooper's father, dated December 8th, stating, "We knew it was only a matter of time." The letter went on to state all the reasons they knew the attack was coming. (In a nutshell, Empires don't like competition from other Empires.)

The State told us that slaughtering scores of thousands of Japanese women and children was "necessary." Posterity fails to note that MacArthur, Nimitz and Halsey all said it was a crock: that Japan was totally militarily defeated, and air and ocean superiority had been attained. Isn't war supposed to be a macrocosm of the principle of self-defense? Neutralize the threat, period? No... war is about glory for those who love it. (And for those who profit by it.)

The State told us that American warships were attacked by torpedo boats at the Tonkin Gulf. Another lie. Who cares? Honeywell, Lockheed, McDonnell, Colt and tens of thousands of other corporate heads got what they wanted. It got them the Viet Nam war.

The State repeated the lie of "Nayirah," an alleged nurse at Kuwait City hospital, testified before Congress, weeping, while describing how those horrible Iraqis had tossed dozens of babies out of their incubators onto the cold floor. They failed to mention (except for NBC) that "Nayirah" was actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti Ambassador to the United State, (surprise!) and that she never worked at the hospital, was not near Kuwait when the Iraqis invaded, and that the entire event never happened to begin with. Based in part on this lie, military pilots were literally told to "put some hate into their hearts" as they raked what is now called "the highway of death" with cannonfire. But who cares? They got their war. The people who needed to made their money.

And now, the United State was "forced" to go to war with a country that was [i]just about [/i]to use nuclear weapons against its neighbors and the United State. The State, with Bush as their mouthpiece, said "The smoking gun could come in the form of a mushroom cloud," but that occupying a country the size of Tejas, filled with even 15% of a population that hates the foreign intruders' guts, is somehow going to prevent terrorists from coming across any porous border they want, whenever they want.

War is a racket, as two-time Medal of Honor winner General Smedley Butler said. I'd rather take the mushroom cloud rather than continually feeding the sausage grinder. But then, I am "without authority." Those in the State know better. They know they just need to make the lie shiny and pretty, play a little emotion-tugging music, and people will be rattling sabres in no time.

If the past 10,000 years of history have failed to teach men that wars are never fought for the reasons the State and its politicians tell them, I consider their ignorance and subsequent willingness to pick up a rifle and die at their behest to be a grave character flaw, not a "noble attribute."

~Sternhauser

Edited November 7, 2009 by Sternhauser

[Nihil Obstat]

Was the First World War justified?

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='dominicansoul' date='06 November 2009 - 07:31 PM' timestamp='1257535881' post='1997256']
...when you think about it, on 9/11, prez bush was reading to a bunch of little kids when he was told about the attacks...he calmly went back to reading not to disturb the little kids...because of this reaction, he was mercilessly attacked by the haters in the media and the dems...

obama went from schmoozing some guy in the audience and accepting laughter and applause to trying to be solemn and serious in his comments about the shooting at Ft. Hood...it was not natural...a very cold response...was it him being insensitive?
[/quote]
I didn't see Obama's response, but this was my reaction regarding comparing this to Bush reading to kids during the 9/11 attacks.

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' date='07 November 2009 - 02:26 AM' timestamp='1257560797' post='1997442']
I like In Flanders Fields.

In Flanders Fields
By: Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae, MD (1872-1918)
Canadian Army
In Flanders Fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.

We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.

Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
[/quote]
I need to get my poppy.