New Ice Cream Flavor!

In honor of the 44th President of the United States, Baskin-Robbins Ice Cream has introduced a new flavor: "Barocky Road" Barocky Road is a blend of half vanilla, half chocolate, And surrounded by nuts and flakes. The vanilla portion of the mix is not openly advertised and usually denied as an ingredient. The nuts and flakes are all very bitter and hard to swallow. The cost is $82.84 per scoop... .so out of a hundred dollar bill you are at least promised some CHANGE..! When purchased it will be presented to you in a large beautiful cone, But after you pay for it, The ice cream is taken away and given to the person in line behind you at no charge. You are left with an empty wallet, Holding an empty cone with no hope of getting any ice cream. Are you stimulated?

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Brand New Obama 2012 Bumper Sticker

Brand New Obama 2012 Bumper Sticker Scotty Starnes | September 6, 2011 at 8:38 AM | Tags: 2012, bumper sticker, President Obama | Categories: Political Issues | URL: http://wp.me/pvnFC-5N8

Add a comment to this post

WordPress.com | Thanks for flying with WordPress! Manage Subscriptions | Unsubscribe | Express yourself. Start a blog.

Trouble clicking? Copy and paste this URL into your browser: http://subscribe.wordpress.com

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Bachmann on Dictators and Socialized Medicine

Bachmann on Dictators and Socialized Medicine
Posted by Laurence Vance on September 6, 2011 07:19 AM

Michele Bachmann, when recently speaking in South Carolina about the requirement in Obama's health care bill that mandates Americans purchase health insurance, said that the federal government "will become a dictator over our lives." Is that so? But what about the federal government mandating that you cannot buy, sell, possess, and smoke marijuana­a plant? I guess the federal government is not a dictator over our lives when it tells us what we can and can't buy, sell, possess, and smoke? Bachmann, like all the major Republican Party presidential candidates (except Ron Paul), believes in selective liberty; that is, the government, including a government controlled by Republicans, should select certain liberties that Americans are allowed to have.

When Bachmann comes out for full legalization of drugs and raw milk then I will cut her some slack. But she will then still be a horrible warmonger, and still unworthy of support.

She also said this about the same subject: "This is the foundation for socialized medicine." No, Michele, the foundation for socialized medicine is Medicare, which Republicans have supported for years, expanded under George Bush, and currently want to save.

9/11 Blowback

I.H.T. Op-Ed Contributor
9/11 Blowback
By H.D.S. GREENWAY
Published: September 1, 2011

Historians will label the events of that September morning 10 years ago as the most destructive act of terrorism ever committed up to that time. But I suspect they will also judge America's last decade as one of history's worst overreactions.

Of course overreaction is what terrorists hope to provoke. If judged by that standard, 9/11 was also one of history's most successful terrorist acts, dragging the United States into two as yet unresolved wars, draining the treasury of $1 trillion and climbing, as well as damaging America's power and prestige. These wars have empowered our enemies and hurt our friendships, and have almost certainly generated more terrorists than they have killed.

Like other victims of terrorism, the United States believed that somehow the answer could be found in brute force. But ideas seldom yield to force, and militant Islam is an idea. The result has been the militarization of U.S. foreign policy.

The brief war to topple the Taliban and rid Afghanistan of Osama bin Laden was admirably executed, using air power, Northern Alliance allies, and a few C.I.A. agents on horseback to achieve a specific goal. The failure to nab Bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahri, to let them escape from Tora Bora where they were cornered, was a spectacular failure.

Our 10-year occupation, and our off-and-on-again attempts at nation building, have been a disaster. At first Afghanistan was starved for resources, taking a back seat to the ill-planned, and ill-advised attack on Iraq. When, at last, Afghanistan became a priority, the moment for success had already passed.

Today the Afghan war has morphed into a war against the Pashtuns ­ perhaps the most war-like people on earth, whom two great empires before us, the Russian and the British, failed to subdue. One could not possibly find a worse place to fight, or a less likely people on whom to impose our will. The Pashtun tribes have risen to the call of Jihad for centuries, and their prowess at battling foreigners is unmatched.

Despite a heavy propaganda campaign to suggest otherwise, the subjugation of the Taliban has been a failure. Counterinsurgency ­ protecting the people and winning their support ­ never really got off the ground. Our strategy seems to be that if we can only kill enough Pashtuns somehow they will agree to surrender.

It is true that the Pashtun tribes and clans have traditionally been willing to switch allegiances when the incentives were sufficiently attractive, so the idea of winning over some groups who are now fighting against us was not totally out of the question.

But so far it has simply not worked, and General David Petraeus fell into the trap into which so many generals before him have fallen: He believed that what he learned in one war, the Iraq war, could be replicated in the next: Afghanistan.

Our British allies made the same mistake, believing that what had succeeded in bringing peace to Northern Ireland could apply to Afghanistan.

As for Iraq, if ever there was an intellectuals' war, it was Iraq. Neoconservative theorists, who knew nothing about Iraq , believed that the transformational power of democracy could change the Middle East ­ make Arabs more like Americans.

But what happened was that Iraq became more like the Middle East, and, although violence has slowed, it has by no means been brought to any semblance of normalcy. None of the underlying questions, the balance of power between Sunnis and Shiites, what should be the relations of Kurdistan to the rest of the country, have been settled.

In the meantime, the Iraq war has greatly empowered Iran, and the reaction of Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki in backing Syria's Bashir al-Assad at Iran's bidding speaks for itself.

The Bush-Cheney years saw a remarkable abrogation of civil liberties in the name of fighting terrorism, and the descent into torture showed how easily fear can bring even a modern democracy over to the dark side.

Although Al Qaeda was remarkably successful at linking together so many of the Muslim world's pockets of grievances, mastering the techniques of the Internet, the fact of the matter is that most Muslims would rather not live under the extreme Wahhabism that Al Qaeda preachs. Bin Laden's ideas about his faith were to Islam what Pol Pot's were to socialism.

But the sad and counterproductive rise of anti-Muslim attitudes in both Europe and the United States since 9/11 testify that Bin Laden was not entirely unsuccessful in driving a wedge between the Islamic world and the West.

A version of this op-ed appeared in print on September 2, 2011, in The International Herald Tribune with the headline: 9/11 Blowback.

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/02/opinion/02iht-edgreenway02.html?_r=1

Re: The lie that began the endless war on Iraq

Just in case you might not have seen it, I post it once again:

 

 

On Tue, Sep 6, 2011 at 10:10 AM, Keith In Tampa <keithintampa@gmail.com> wrote:

Just off the top of my head, here's a couple:

 

http://articles.cnn.com/2008-07-07/us/iraq.uranium_1_yellowcake-uranium-cameco?_s=PM:US

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_poison_gas_attack

 

On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 11:55 PM, plainolamerican <plainolamerican@gmail.com> wrote:

.....Just revisionist historians with agenda

----
no, just historical facts

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/

the US interventionist policy is a complete failure and gets American
soldiers needlessly killed

U.S. imperialism in the Middle East has always been primarily
responsible for upholding backward, dictatorial regimes that, without
its help, would have been overthrown long ago. Middle East specialist
Dilip Hiro spelled it out: "It is much simpler to manipulate a few
ruling families (and to secure fat orders for arms and ensure that oil
prices remain low) than a wide variety of personalities and policies
bound to be thrown up by a democratic system." But such brutality
always provokes a reaction--as the new Intifada shows. "If history is
any guide," writes Michael Hudson, "hegemony by the United States or
any other party in the Middle East tends to produce resistance." That
resistance is back--not just in the Intifada in Palestine, but in the
large sympathy demonstrations throughout the region.
U.S. Intervention in the Middle East: Blood for Oil
By Paul D'Amato
1991

On Sep 5, 9:32 am, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The problem is with Paul's theory, is that there is no lie......Just
> revisionist historians with agenda,  (*e.g*.:  "Isolationism") like Paul.
>
> On Mon, Sep 5, 2011 at 9:03 AM, plainolamerican

> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > the lies that keep the US military in the middle east never end
>
> > we know who is telling the lies and who they represent
>
> > some don't forget
>
> > On Sep 4, 7:26 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > The lie that began the endless war on IraqSeptember 4, 2011 byJeffrey
> > Tucker
> > > Wikileaks confirms everything.
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGKEnwhcScg&feature=player_embedded
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/

> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.