Tuesday, April 17, 2012

Re: Two more of obama's sons get a dirt nap

why didn't the news report give the race of the victims?

it would be helpful if the home owners are asian or bi-racial

just so the public gets to see who the real criminals are

On Apr 16, 12:44 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> http://www2.wnct.com/news/2012/apr/15/14/police-two-intruders-shot-an...

--
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.

Jonathan Pollard is dead

http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinion-jonathan-pollard-is-dead/2012/04/10/

Jonathan Pollard is dead. He died in Butler maximum security prison
after 27 years of incarceration. Although many top US security
officials joined Israeli efforts for the release of the Israeli
operative, Pollard's health had deteriorated markedly in the last few
years resulting finally in his death.

The above headline is not true yet, but it may be weeks, days, or
hours away from being true. Don't avoid the thought of Pollard's
death, look it squarely in the face and ask yourself how you will feel
when you hear the news.

If Jonathan Pollard dies in prison then our whole generation will die
just a little. We will all bear the stain of having not helped the man
who risked his life to protect Israel. When our children will ask us:
"Were you around when Jonathan Pollard was alive? Why did he die in
prison?" The shameful answer will be: "Yes I was around, and I did not
do enough to help him…"

To remind you: Pollard was a US Naval intelligence analyst who passed
information to Israel, an ally, about its own self-defense. He was
caught and agreed to a plea bargain, and instead of getting 2-4 years
like agents who spied against the US for enemy states, Pollard got
life in prison without parole. This harsh sentence came about as a
result of affidavits written to the court by then-Secretary of Defense
Caspar Weinberger. Weinberger has been discredited by the likes of
Robert "Bud" McFarlane, Ronald Reagan's National Security Advisor at
the time, who has written to President Obama stating that Weinberger
had a history of "unbalanced reasoning" when it came to Israel. But
Pollard is still in prison and if he dies, Israel's relationship with
the US will be forever marred. The ugliness of this whole affair will
surface, and it will not sink away like some people would like it to.
The stain will grow darker and uglier.

The US presents itself as the global champion of liberty, yet this
miscarriage of justice goes on and on. How many more US leaders must
stand up so that this torture ends? As Lawrence Korb has written:
"Most of the major decision-makers who were intimately involved in the
case have issued public calls for clemency. They include former
Secretary of State George Shultz, former Senator David Durenberger (R-
MI) (who served as Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on
Intelligence at the time of Pollard's conviction), and former
Congressman Lee Hamilton (R-IN) (Chairman of the House Intelligence
Committee at the time of Pollard's sentencing)… Key figures who viewed
the classified damage assessment years later also favor Pollard's
release. They include former head of Senate Intelligence Dennis
DeConcini (D-AZ), Deputy Attorney General Philip Heymann, Attorney
General Michael Mukasey, White House counsel Bernard Nussbaum, as well
as James Woolsey, former Director of the CIA. Mukasey, who was
attorney general for George W. Bush, stated it well when he wrote that
no one alleges Pollard intended to harm the United States with his
actions – nor was he ever charged with harming the US."

I am calling on Israel's gentile friends: This is the hour of your
test – will you let this Jew, who is serving an immoral life sentence
for defending Israel, die? Do you want this on your conscience? What
will you say to those Jews who ask you: "With all the love you show
Israel, did you raise your voice to defend a man who languished – and
died – in your prison for attempting to save the Jewish State?" It is
your time to stand up and use the democratic channels of which America
is so proud. Pull out all the stops. You already have top brass behind
the cause, but now the voice of the people must be heard. Make sure
your congressmen, senators, and president know that this will not
stand. Because without justice and liberty, what is America?

That being said, it is easy to pass the buck. We can blame the US all
we want, but have we Israelis made it clear that we demand Pollard's
freedom? No. We went to work, and sent our kids to school, we had a
Pesach Seder and some of us mentioned Jonathan's name, even left a
chair for him.

But we did not disrupt our lives, and we did not do enough to disrupt
our government's life and the life of Jewish organizations who
represent us. We certainly did not do enough to disrupt the US
government's daily business. In other words, Pollard's slow death did
not matter enough for us to shake things up.

There are efforts being made, for sure: Shimon Peres was handed a
letter by the Pollard lobby chairman MK Uri Ariel who said: "Mr.
President, I submit to you a letter for President Obama that has been
signed by 81 MKs and which calls on him to release Jonathan Pollard.
We would be very grateful if you would deliver this letter at your
meeting with President Obama in June. We are asking the President of
the State of Israel not to wait until the Presidential Medal of
freedom award ceremony and even now present this official request to
the US President that he pardons Jonathan Pollard on humanitarian
grounds forthwith." President Peres did issue a quick letter to
President Obama calling for Pollard's immediate release on health and
humanitarian grounds. But the answer, so far, has been disappointing.

After news of Pollard's hospitalization, PM Netanyahu's Media Advisor
communicated the following: "The time has come to release Jonathan
Pollard. The Festival of Freedom of all Jews needs to become Jonathan
Pollard's private festival of freedom. I have done much, and will
continue work, for his release."

Dear Prime Minister Netanyahu: If you keep 'working' for his release,
Pollard will soon be dead. There is no more 'work' for his release, no
more finessing, no more cajoling, no more games. For your own sake,
for your legacy, you need to get him out, now. Place the weight of
Israel behind this issue: call in the friends, make some threats,
throw some muscle around. Mr. Prime Minister: Make this a priority.
Now.

I do not want the stain of Pollard's ugly death in prison to be on my
conscience. I do not want his death to be on my nation's conscience. I
do not want it on the conscience of PM Netanyahu or President Peres. I
do not want it on the conscience of Israel's gentile friends, or even
the US administration. I do not want the ugly stain to be a permanent
scar on the historical record and the collective memory of this
generation. But it's all about to happen. Unless something changes,
Jonathan Pollard will die in Butler prison in the next few weeks,
days, or hours.

But this is not the hour of despondency. Jonathan is still alive.
Everything else has to stop until we fix this. For Jonathan's sake, as
much as ours.


About the Author: Yishai Fleisher is the Managing Editor at the Jewish
Press Online, and Israel's only English language broadcast radio show
host (Galey Yisrael 106.5FM). Yishai is an Israeli Paratrooper, a
graduate of Cardozo Law School, and the founder of Kumah ("Arise" in
Hebrew), an NGO dedicated to promoting Zionism and strengthening
Israel's national character. Yishai is married to Malkah, they have
two children, and they live on the Mount of Olives in Jerusalem.

--
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.

bring on the whores!!!

WASHINGTON -- The top U.S. military officer said Monday the nation's
military leadership is embarrassed by allegations of misconduct
against several U.S. military members at a Colombia hotel on the eve
of President Barack Obama's visit over the weekend.

"We let the boss down," Army Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Pentagon news conference. He said he
regretted that the scandal, which also involved 11 Secret Service
agents accused of cavorting with prostitutes at the hotel, diverted
attention from Obama's diplomacy at a Latin America summit.

"I can speak for myself and my fellow chiefs: We're embarrassed by
what occurred in Colombia, though we're not sure exactly what it is,"
Dempsey added.

Pentagon officials said earlier Monday that the number of military
members involved in the scandal may be greater than the five
originally cited.

Pentagon press secretary George Little said that he could not provide
a specific number, but that military members who are being
investigated were assigned to support the Secret Service in
preparation for Obama's official visit to Cartagena. He said they were
not directly involved in presidential security.

"We believe that there may be more than five involved in this
incident," Little said.

The Secret Service sent 11 of its agents home from Colombia amid
allegations that they had hired prostitutes at a Cartagena hotel. The
military members being investigated were staying at the same hotel,
Little said.

Appearing with Dempsey at the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta
said U.S. troops are expected to abide by "the highest standards" of
behavior whether they are at home or abroad. He noted that a military
investigation is under way and promised that if wrongdoing is
confirmed, "these individuals will be held accountable."

Army Col. Scott Malcom, chief spokesman for U.S. Southern Command,
which organized the military team that was assigned to support the
Secret Service's mission in Cartagena, declined to say how many
additional service members are under investigation. He also would not
say which branch of the military they were from.

"We are still putting together all the facts," Malcom said.

A defense official in Washington said at least some of those under
investigation are members of the Army. The official spoke on condition
of anonymity because the matter is under active investigation.

Malcom said a colonel from the Southern Command staff, whom he would
not identify by name, had been sent to Cartagena to gather facts. He
said at least five military members under investigation were being
flown to Miami Monday.

The U.S. Southern Command had announced on Saturday that five service
members assigned to the presidential mission in Colombia had violated
curfew and may have been involved in "inappropriate conduct."

In a statement Saturday, Air Force Gen. Douglas Fraser, commander of
Southern Command, said he was "disappointed by the entire incident"
and that "this behavior is not in keeping with the professional
standards expected of members of the United States military."

The Secret Service placed the 11 agents on leave while the agency
reviews what happened.

"I expect that investigation to be thorough, and I expect it to be
rigorous," Obama said Sunday. "If it turns out that some of the
allegations that have been made in the press are confirmed, then of
course I'll be angry. ... We are representing the people of the United
States, and when we travel to another country, I expect us to observe
the highest standards."

California Rep. Darrell Issa, chairman of a House investigative panel,
said he wasn't certain whether Congress would hold hearings on the
alleged misconduct. But lawmakers will be looking "over the shoulder"
of the Secret Service, he said, to make sure that the agency's methods
for training and screening agents aren't endangering the nation's
VIPs.

------

Associated Press writer Pauline Jelinek contributed to this report.

--
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.

Re: What Would Reagan Do?

No question,  Peggy Noonan, a once respected woman in the Reagan Administration,  has been drinking the Kool-Aid, and is as goofy as most far left extremists that she is surrounded by in D.C.....Time for her to leave the City,  her fifteen minutes of fame are over.
 


 
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 12:41 PM, plainolamerican <plainolamerican@gmail.com> wrote:
What Would Reagan Do?
---
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ckc1_mETSps

On Apr 16, 7:53 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> What Would Reagan Do?Posted by David Boaz
> Peggy Noonan, who once worked with Ronald Reagan to shape his words, has some useful advice for today s Republicans in Saturday s Wall Street Journal:Finally, in foreign affairs the Republican candidates staked out dangerous ground. They want to show they re strong on defense. Fine, we should have a strong defense, the best in the world. But that is different from having an aggressive foreign policy stance, and every one of the GOP candidates, with the exceptions of Ron Paul and Jon Huntsman, was aggressive. This is how their debates sounded: We should bomb Iran Thursday. No, stupid, we should bomb Iran on Wednesday. How could you be so foolish? You know we do all our bombings on Monday. You re wrong, we send in the destroyers and arm the insurgents on Monday.There was no room for discretion, prudence, nuance, to use unjustly maligned terms. There was no room for an expressed bias toward not-fighting. But grown-ups really do have a bias toward not-fighting.They are allowing the GOP to be painted as the war party. They are ceding all non-war ground to the president, who can come forward as the sober, constrained, non-bellicose contender. Do they want that? Are they under the impression America is hungry for another war? Really? After the past 11 years?The GOP used to be derided by Democrats as the John Wayne party: It loved shoot- em-ups. Actually, John Wayne didn t ride into town itching for a fight, and he didn t ride in shooting off his mouth, either. He was laconic, observant. He rode in hoping for peace, but if something broke out he was ready. He had a gun, it was loaded, and he knew how to use it if he had to.But he didn t want to have to. Which was part of his character s power. The GOP should go back to being John Wayne.When Ronald Reagan s speechwriter tells you you need to be less trigger-happy and more like John Wayne, you probably need to recalibrate.http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/what-would-reagan-do/

--
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.

Re: [PresidentBarakObama] How Can Anyone Be Gay and Republican?

Where Andrew Sullivan, and Lil'MarxistMoonbatTommyTomTomForNews misses the mark,  is that the Republican Party is not, "Anti-Gay".  Conservatives, and especially Conservative Libertarians are not, "Anti-Gay", and there is no movement within the Republican Party to prohibit or restrict civil rights among any group or individual. 
 
What the majority of Americans are opposed to, is allowing any group or individual "Additional Rights and Privileges"; which many militant secularists who are attempting to carve out, as well as them being  hell bent on revising our national history.
 
Lil'MarxistMoonbatTommyTomTomForNews along with Andrew Sullivan are merely foot soldiers for the likes of Saul Alinsky,  Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen.
 
 
 
 
On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 1:23 PM, Bruce Majors <majors.bruce@gmail.com> wrote:
You support democrats who believe in forcing gay kids to foot school where ther are beaten and you oppose school choice that would allow them to go to a safer school

You do this because your party depends on the slave trade for campaign funds

You round up kids, especially poor brown and lack kids, and sell them to the education cartels for campaign donatio s

Theirs blood and suicides are your alt

You are a homophobe, for pay


On Monday, April 16, 2012, Tommy News wrote:
Gay Republicans are self-loathing hypocrites who support oppression
and bigotry against themselves.

I know one who rails against Marriage Equality, repeating what he
hears on Faux Noise for the Parrots.

How Can Anyone Be Gay and Republican?

"To join a party on condition that we oppose our own civil rights and
our own basic civil equality seems a non-starter for me," says the
conservative blogger. "There's something quite nauseating about it
actually."

Question: How can anyone call himself a gay Republican?

Andrew Sullivan:  You know, I used to say, we have to stay in these
parties because certainly gay people do not want to become a
Democratic Party constituency that is totally taken for granted, which
is, of course, what has happened.  When you have no leverage over the
party, they don't do anything for you—except take your money and
invite you to cocktail parties, which is all that's happened really in
two years under Obama with two houses of Congress.

But at the same time, you know, this Homocon thing... it was in
someone's apartment.  I mean the idea that this has been any genuine
meaning out there for most people, there are plenty of gay people;
many, many, many more I think than other minority groups actually, who
would love a party of limited small government, prudent, strong
foreign policy, balanced budgets, live and let live, like the British
Tories.  And if the Republican Party ever becomes that again, I think
there will be plenty of places for gay people in it.
But to do so and join a party on condition that we oppose our own
civil rights and our own basic civil equality seems a non-starter for
me.  I mean, it's... there's something quite nauseating about it
actually.  And you see even, like, Chris Barron who is the head of
Homocon, or whatever they are calling themselves, GOProud, having to
say that when Jim DeMint goes on and says that no gay person should be
a school teacher, which is to the—which Ronald Reagan rejected in
1978—where are you left?  I mean, it's also important to remember that
the Republican Party is now a Southern party. So the old Republican
party, which had a balance of different regions and was based also in
the Libertarian West—and remember how Goldwater ended up—and of course
many elite Republicans, by which I mean a lot of people in Washington,
are completely comfortable and accepting of gay people, and support
our right to marry and our right to serve our country without lying
about ourselves, which are just the two non-negotiables.  But they are
cravenly incapable of either understanding the importance of that or
taking us as serious human beings.

I mean, I'm sorry, but Dick Cheney is not going to pass Mary Cheney,
who is organizing to get a Republican majority that will make sure
that gay people never serve openly in the military.  And support a
Republican Party in her own state that will strip her even the most
basic contractual rights with her wife and children.  At this point,
I'm sorry, but no.

Question: So how should gay conservatives vote—against their political
beliefs or against their rights as humans?

Andrew Sullivan:  They have to vote for whichever candidate they think
is the least worst option.  And not... and of course we don't just
vote on our sexual orientation.  And on the critical issues, the
critical issue of marriage, it's fundamentally a state issue anyway,
although DOMA remains you know, a terrible blight on our national
federal equality.  So, I've never been a partisan, I've never been a
Republican, I've never been a  Democrat, ever, which is why I was very
frustrated being called a gay Republican when I never attached myself
to that.  You just have to keep going.  I mean I think our job, my
job, is to keep articulating that I exist and that there are lots of
people like me exist and we just have no home.

But if temporarily we seek a home with Obama, or with people who are
less hostile to us and we are not also too opposed to their other
policies, then that's the compromise that we all have to make.

More:
http://bigthink.com/ideas/24588


 Andrew Sullivan


--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy



--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy


------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PresidentBarakObama/

<*> Your email settings:
   Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
   http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PresidentBarakObama/join
   (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
   PresidentBarakObama-digest@yahoogroups.com
   PresidentBarakObama-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
   PresidentBarakObama-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
   http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

--
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.