Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Capn Jack, Feb 15, 2013.
If this isn't a slap in the face!!!!
business as usual.
Yep, it was posted on another thread some days ago.
I don't recall a time in our country when we had this much distrust of each other and were so polorized. Our president has been continuously and purposely devisive and there doesn't seem to be an end is sight. Seems like very unsettling times.
I couldn't agree more with your assessment of the divisiveness of this administration. On every point across the board from racial to political. He depends on charisma to distract from the real issues. The general public is not aware enough and they know it.
It's been massively divisive for years. People just think it's a new thing. The least-divisiveness we've had as long as I can remember was at the very end of the Clinton administration - when there was a solidly Republican congress, and Democratic president. Both sides knew they had to reach deals. The good economy helped - there didn't have to be much divisiveness over fiscal matters, and people were generally happy enough to avoid too much controversy over social issues.
Yet even then, there was divisiveness.
I think the only time you don't really "feel" divisiveness is when your political leaning is in power across-the-board. When the Democrats had control of both houses and the presidency, Democrats felt like things weren't divisive at all. When Republicans had control of both houses and the presidency, they didn't think things were divisive.
And of course not. The party in power is getting in general what they want, maybe with some minor concessions that they're willing to consider "bipartisanship", while the other side is getting nothing, and feeling completely marginalized.
Yes, there is something to what you're saying, but have you ever seen a time in the recent history of our country when the president didn't trust the military?
The president SHOULDN'T trust the military. They don't work for him. They work for US.
Think again. This the oath I took:
I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
I see a severe conflict.
The president is a tool/puppet of the British Oligarch familes that own/control this nation. A very effective puppet this time around. I thought GWB was the best puppet power could buy at the time, but they outdid themselves with this one. A personality cult where all handed down orders carried though are unquestioned and every step toward slavery and tyranny applauded. Brilliant really. Oligarchs = cunning, ruthless, smart. Americans = not so much.
Why would Marines need to be armed at an Inaugural parade?
All part of the king's master plan my friend. "Look at this everybody... if the Marines can go unarmed, so can you!"
He never was my Commander in Chief, anyway
They're parade rifles and aren't functional anyway. Removing the bolt is another way to make sure that the secret service doesn't need to worry about the military. I wasn't aware that there were direct threats to Obama from the military but why else would this president distrust them?
omg yes british oligarchs control the country.
i tnink when the reps were accusing clinton of being a drug dealer, murdering vince foster and impeaching him it was pretty divisive
a. the president doesnt micro manage the color guard b. another active duty guy posted that those rifles never have bolts installed
whether thats true or not, assuming the president ordered that they be 'disarmed' is some tin foil hat looking for evi dence to support your established opinions. you want him to be evil
dumbest statement going around the internet these days
and out come the trolls!
The title of the thread is misleading and inaccurate.
Barack Obama did not personally make the decision to have the bolts removed from the rifles, any more than he decided where to stack the chairs or store the podium or set up the awnings that were used in the inauguration.
I'm not defending the man, just pointing out a fact. Figuring out the logisitics and security arrangments for the inauguration are the responsibility of the Secret Service, not the President.
I would not be surprised to find out that the same rifles with missing bolts were used when Bush was inaugurated.
There are plenty of genuine problems that can and should be blamed upon Obama, but this isnt one of them.
I asked my Navy friend and he said it is SOP that parade and drill M1's are made inoperable, and has been for as long as he has served.
This is just another BS story, circulated to make conservatives look like idiots. Although not as bad as Burt's British Oligarchy conspiracy...
..Nope, just the liberals. Suge206 has, But give it time.. Jimmy and Sonic will chime in here soon.