Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Post by **SeattleGriz** » Mon Oct 05, 2009 11:59 pm

Seems the big mouthed Dems who so vociferously bitched about the Patriot Act, are about to pass three "sunsetting" Patriot Act powers.

The Obama administration had requested reauthorisation of all three "sunsetting" Patriot-Act powers: roving wiretap authority; license to spy on so-called "lone wolf" terror suspects under the broad aegis of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance act; and "section 215" orders, which allow investigators to compel the production of business records or any other "tangible thing". Yet the Justice Department had also signaled its openness to "modifications" designed to protect the privacy of Americans and check potential abuses.

http://www.economist.com/blogs/democrac ... reappr.cfm

How many times do Dems have to be slapped in the face with their own hypocrisy? Maybe it is because they don't know how to fight a war and must rely on Republicans to show them the way. If they knew, why not make changes?

Oh yeah, milquetoast Obama has now COMPLETELY agreed with all Bush's anti-terror policies? Why? Because he can't come up with anything original. I called it MONTHS ago.

Oh yeah, how is that closing of Guantanamo within the year going? Another flail by this very inept administration.

Post by **Cleets Part 2** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 4:30 am

Post by **Ivytalk** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:46 am

I don't know about you, but I prefer ConkDogs!

Post by **BlueHen86** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:52 am

Ivytalk wrote:I don't know about you, but I prefer ConkDogs!

Conkfurters

ALPHAGRIZ1 · Post by **ALPHAGRIZ1** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:13 am

The silence in here is LOUD

Post by **AZGrizFan** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:14 am

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:The silence in here is LOUD

They're out scouring the internet looking for a Republican in a sex scandal.

Post by **dbackjon** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:21 am

Very disapointing. Another reason why Obama is likely toast in 2012 - pissing off the left when he does stuff that the right would like, but the right are too busy trying to bash Obama to give him any credit when he does something they like.

Obama just needs to realize that the Rush/Hannity led Republican Party will NEVER, EVER be bipartisan, that doing anything that they might like is futile, and that he needs to cater to the people that elected - the 56% of Americans that hate the direction that the Republican Party took America.

Post by **AZGrizFan** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:23 am

dbackjon wrote:Very disapointing. Another reason why Obama is likely toast in 2012 - pissing off the left when he does stuff that the right would like, but the right are too busy trying to bash Obama to give him any credit when he does something they like.

Obama just needs to realize that the Rush/Hannity led Republican Party will NEVER, EVER be bipartisan, that doing anything that they might like is futile, and that he needs to cater to the people that elected - the 56% of Americans that hate the direction that the Republican Party took America.

You're missing the point. Again.

It's not about him doing "something they like". It's about the absolute HYPOCRISY of his administration, on display REPEATEDLY. Just about EVERY aspect of Bush's anti-terror program---all those "mistakes" that Obama RAILED against during the campain----have been reaffirmed and renewed under Obama's watch....

However, we agree on one thing: Obama is toast in 2012.

Post by **Cleets Part 2** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:43 am

AZGrizFan wrote: However, we agree on one thing: Obama is toast in 2012.

agreed...

CitadelGrad · Post by **CitadelGrad** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 8:57 am

AZGrizFan wrote:However, we agree on one thing: Obama is toast in 2012.

Obama was always just another Jimmy Carter waiting to happen, minus the courage of his convictions -- and the convictions.

Post by **SeattleGriz** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 5:01 pm

dbackjon wrote:Very disapointing. Another reason why Obama is likely toast in 2012 - pissing off the left when he does stuff that the right would like, but the right are too busy trying to bash Obama to give him any credit when he does something they like.

Obama just needs to realize that the Rush/Hannity led Republican Party will NEVER, EVER be bipartisan, that doing anything that they might like is futile, and that he needs to cater to the people that elected - the 56% of Americans that hate the direction that the Republican Party took America.

I specifically chose The Economist because it is an English paper. Figured they would be somewhat neutral, and at the very least, a different perspective.

Post by **AZGrizFan** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 5:02 pm

The lib silence on this latest in a long line of Obama backtracks is deafening.

Post by **Ivytalk** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 5:05 pm

dbackjon wrote:Obama just needs to realize that the Rush/Hannity led Republican Party will NEVER, EVER be bipartisan, that doing anything that they might like is futile, and that he needs to cater to the people that elected - the 56% of Americans that hate the direction that the Republican Party took America.

Gosh, jon, you're starting to sound like a gay Howard Dean!

ALPHAGRIZ1 · Post by **ALPHAGRIZ1** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 5:54 pm

dbackjon wrote: Obama just needs to realize that the Rush/Hannity led Republican Party will NEVER, EVER be bipartisan, that doing anything that they might like is futile, and that he needs to cater to the people that elected - the 56% of Americans that hate the direction that the Republican Party took America.

Nor should they ever be bipartisan, there is only one right way to do something and if you lower your position to make someone "feel good" then you just changed your original position.

If more people were like this and stuck to their guns, the world would be a better place.

Post by **Appaholic** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:08 pm

AZGrizFan wrote:
dbackjon wrote:Very disapointing. Another reason why Obama is likely toast in 2012 - pissing off the left when he does stuff that the right would like, but the right are too busy trying to bash Obama to give him any credit when he does something they like.

Obama just needs to realize that the Rush/Hannity led Republican Party will NEVER, EVER be bipartisan, that doing anything that they might like is futile, and that he needs to cater to the people that elected - the 56% of Americans that hate the direction that the Republican Party took America.
You're missing the point. Again.

It's not about him doing "something they like". It's about the absolute HYPOCRISY of his administration, on display REPEATEDLY. Just about EVERY aspect of Bush's anti-terror program---all those "mistakes" that Obama RAILED against during the campain----have been reaffirmed and renewed under Obama's watch....

However, we agree on one thing: Obama is toast in 2012.

You are correct AZ. However, I'm more concerned the hypocrisy of the vocal left who decried ALL of these policies (rightly so IMO due to personal freedom & privacy issues)...where is the outrage? As much as I hated the previous administration & wanted to use my vote to send a message, I'm so glad I didn't fall for the hype that is this admin & voted my conscience with the third party....once again, the followers of one party have proven they have no more credibility nor are no more concerned with liberty & personal freedom than followers of the other party....what a shame...

...go to he!! you self-righteous, hypocritical Dems..

Post by **Appaholic** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:09 pm

ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:
dbackjon wrote: Obama just needs to realize that the Rush/Hannity led Republican Party will NEVER, EVER be bipartisan, that doing anything that they might like is futile, and that he needs to cater to the people that elected - the 56% of Americans that hate the direction that the Republican Party took America.
Nor should they ever be bipartisan, there is only one right way to do something and if you lower your position to make someone "feel good" then you just changed your original position.

If more people were like this and stuck to their guns, the world would be a better place.

Sorry Alfie, but that is a totally ridiculous statement....and one used repeatedly by muslim terrorists to justify beheadings.....

Post by **Cleets Part 2** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 6:53 pm

Appaholic wrote:
ALPHAGRIZ1 wrote:
Nor should they ever be bipartisan, there is only one right way to do something and if you lower your position to make someone "feel good" then you just changed your original position.

If more people were like this and stuck to their guns, the world would be a better place.
Sorry Alfie, but that is a totally ridiculous statement....and one used repeatedly by muslim terrorists to justify beheadings.....

But this has been a good thread (with a few exceptions)
I am fascinated to hear Obama explain to the people who elected him how his last 60 days have been "good for America" - frankly I'm disappointed

Pwns · Post by **Pwns** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 7:03 pm

This isn't going to hurt Obama. The idea of civil liberties just isn't selling in this country right now. This should be proof of how the federal government just gets more power with every administration. The conks complain about powers granted the feds by the donks and do nothing when they take control, and the flipside is true.

Is it time to sound the alarm for government getting out of control yet?

Post by **BlueHen86** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 10:07 pm

Cleets Part 2 wrote:
AZGrizFan wrote: However, we agree on one thing: Obama is toast in 2012.

agreed...

Not agreed, just watch.

Marion Barry, Wilson Goode...

Obama gets re-elected because some people will vote for him no matter what.

native · Post by **native** » Tue Oct 06, 2009 10:25 pm

BlueHen86 wrote:
Cleets Part 2 wrote:

agreed...
Not agreed, just watch.

Marion Barry, Wilson Goode...

Obama gets re-elected because some people will vote for him no matter what.

Where is kleanie when you need him?

Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?

Re: Lib Weiners, where is your outrage?