Touche. You are correct, I overstated.
Treason is unpatriotic, period?
Edit:even then there's the likes of Chelsea Manning, who some would say was a patriotic traitor....so what is my point?

I'm not prepared to debate the morality of a different timeline, but I disagree that force wouldn't be justified to try to preserve the Union from armed secession....now if 2/3 of the state's voted to disband...or 3/4, whatever the line is, yes, monstrous to wage war to force it's preservation, but they didn't do that.

I do agree the police likely could and should have done more, as they have in the past, but I missed something else here. What about the right wing militias?
There were hundreds of camo wearing, AK toting militia members there (from out of town) that CLAIMED they only came along to keep the peace (not to menace), but I have yet to see a single instance where one or more of them made a single move to actually keep the peace. Instead, I have seen them used as human shields for Nazis who attack people then run behind the wall of guns for protection...then repeat. Clearly, unless that's more misdirection/narrative (which could be proven with a few videos of them actually keeping the peace and stopping Nazi violence and protecting counter protesters), the militia members were also doing their best to be setting the whole thing up to guarantee it turned into a 2 party riot...a riot where only their side was armed to the teeth...right? /grin

Side note...why is it so often missed that these people are so dumb they think they can be patriotic and Nazi confederates at the same time? I would counter that supporting and idolizing the confederacy is akin to a Syrian supporting and idolizing Daesh. It was a movement who's main objective was the destruction of the United States. If ever there was a more anti-American, unpatriotic group, I've not heard of them.

You've got to use his full name or you're just talking crap behind his back...
@bobknight33...tired of winning yet?

3+ weeks of letting him keep security clearance after Trump knew he lied repeatedly about illegal Russian conversations and promises he made to them....so why did his trust erode now and not when he was told? Certainly not because they were caught red handed lying about it, right?
And his issue isn't the illegal, unpatriotic collusion with Russia or lying about it to everyone, it's that crime being exposed that he's going to work to ensure isn't repeated.

@vil
here is the thing though,and it is something that i find very disappointing.

when maddow came over from air america radio,who worked with such hosts as thom hartman,sam seder,lawrence odonnell,al franken,laura flanders.she was fantastic.

yes,she was a tad biased and the political points she chose to cover tended to lean liberal democrat,BUT her analysis and her ability to break down complicated and complex political issues into easily digested and understood nuggets,was a talent i truly admired in her.

in my opinion,she was the best host MSNBC had on their channel,and proved time and time again just how political saavy she was,and her ability to expose political shenanigans was unmatched by any other host..again..my opinion..but then obama won his second term,and i noticed a shift in her show.

she slowly stopped being so voracious when it came to exposing the more...shall we say..venal and destructive policies obama was beginning to execute,and started making excuses for those activities.apologizing in essence.

ok..ok..she was becoming an apologist for the highest office in amercia.there..happy?

to say that watching this transition bummed me out is a understatement.for years i could always count on maddow to break down and disseminate political talking points,partisan wordplay and reveal the bullshit behind the polished turd.

then here comes the run up to the 2016 election,and i watched maddow,in real time,go from a part-time apologist for obama to a full time apologist for hillary clinton.

you can watch her actively cheerlead for clinton against sanders.even when the DNC was caught RED-HANDED fucking sanders over,maddow downplayed the entire mess,and focused on debbie wasserman shultz,while giving clinton a pass.as if debbie wasserman shultz was in no way connected to hillary..even when the evidence plainly proved that there WAS a connection.

so you are right @vil .
much of how maddow disseminates political situations is eerily similar to RT,when it comes to state sponsored cheerleading.

host:the problem we are being faced with is:apple or oranges.

viewer: but what about those bananas over there? and those cherries.

host:there are NO bananas or cherries!
there are ONLY apples and oranges!

viewer:but i am pretty sure i see bananas and cherries.

host:you are being a pinko commie,and why do hate america? are you a sympathetic terrorist? or just simply a racist?

viewer:sorry i asked.i don't want to be called an unpatriotic racist.

at least that is how i see it.
not saying my opinion amounts to anything more than screaming into a wind tunnel,but i used to really admire maddow.

Yeah he embarrasses her with his stupidity, as he embarrasses me. So fake news picks a naive college student to debate, and when she starts putting her thoughts together to make a point he interrupts her like the condescending asshole that he is.

I'm sorry, but you wouldn't need the top 1% to pay nowhere near 90% in taxes to cover education. Just a made up number to make her look stupid as she didn't know how to answer it.

With a higher percent of more educated people, they as a whole would be making more money to contribute to the tax fund, increasing revenue.

And really Neil, rich people would leave the honey hole because we taxed them more? How about we start taxing and putting tariffs on companies that go into these third world countries for cheap labor to export products back here. Fuck em if they want to leave, they will no longer be "hoarding" the money and it would allow other companies to fill the void and thrive.

And her point that was so rudely interrupted was spot on, "There is a population that is doing nothing to contribute to the progression of society"

And lastly, these are all moot points if we just quit dumping all our money into the military, and it's not even going to benefit our veterans, but to the select few who own these government contracts. Why do they NEVER Talk about that? Why do we have to continuously be engaged in some kind of war? Oh, that's right to convince people we need a bigger military budget, more spying...blah blah blah...unpatriotic if you don't agree...blah blah...scare people into some kind of threat..

I'm sorry this particular girl wasn't ready for this debate, she probably had a speech prepared they told her she could give.

My forefathers fought and many of them gave their lives to secure my (and your, and his) right to not answer questions or to be forced to make statements designed to incriminate myself.
It's incredibly MORE disrespectful and discourteous to ignore their total sacrifice by waiving those hard won rights than it is to not answer questions...especially when you DO calmly and clearly explain why you don't talk to officers.

The officers, on the other hand, are legally REQUIRED to answer your questions about 'are you detaining me', 'do you have reason to believe I'm committing a crime', and 'what crime are you charging me with'. They may not remain silent.

Yes, many 'situations' might be avoided if you capitulate and waive all your rights, but that behavior is 100% un-American, unpatriotic, disrespectful, and degrades the freedom of every citizen every time it's done. Sometimes having a legal right to 'act like a douche' DOES mean you should 'act like a douche' (if, as you seem to think, not participating in the investigation of your possible criminal acts is 'acting like a douche', that is).

Is English a second language, or are you just being disingenuous? Me thinks the latter. No...publicly owned roads are NOT toll roads because they are paid for with taxes. Taxes and tolls are different things, that's why they are spelled and pronounced differently. I live on a private road..so I'm certain they must exist.
It is absolutely NOT illegal to create a private toll road on private property with private funds. That's just asinine. It is nearly impossible to build one without using public services, such as the public roads and ports needed to deliver materials, but certainly not illegal.

It's leaching off me if you don't pay your fair share, and you have made it clear you don't think you should have to pay any, so I must assume you do all you can to minimize what you put into the pot...so yes, I would make an educated guess that you are leaching off me. I don't even itemize deductions, because I feel grateful to live in what I feel is a great country, and feel it's unpatriotic to try to shirk my duty to pay for my portion of government, even if I disagree with how they spend most of it. That's the cost of living in a 'representative democracy'.

As to mail, yes, you may not use mail boxes set up for/by the USPS for a private mail service...so you can't do 'first class mail'. You can, however, deliver letters for a fee to your OWN style of 'letter box', so your claim they have a 'monopoly' is ridiculous, they would be so happy to have it taken over, it's a big money loser and a huge pain in the ass to keep going. I'm personally grateful mail hasn't yet been privatized, as I know full well the service would suffer badly to make it profitable, for me especially since I live in the boonies and would never be profitable as a customer. To deliver my letters by FedEx would cost 10 times what USPS charges. (by the way, FedEx and UPS are proof that you already CAN deliver 'mail' privately, just not into a USPS 'mail box')
EDIT: What you said was akin to me saying 'Instead of just complaining about the quality of available burgers, you could open your own hamburger stand' and you answering 'I can't...it's illegal for me to sell "Big Mac's" because...government'.

AND, I would add, you have still never addressed my original point, that if business could/would 'self regulate', they would be doing so now. Self regulation is total fantasy, it simply doesn't happen. How exactly, I wonder, are 'the people' supposed to gain the knowledge about a companie's violations of public trust and health if there's no regulatory agency inspecting and reporting on what the company is actually doing, and they can do all their evil in secret?

Yet again another Pro-Israeli proves himself to be unpatriotic

These treasonous scum-fucks would send their country and soldiers to war, killing their own countrymen, destroying their own economy in the process, all for Israel.

Unpatriotic? Wanting to know your enemy inside and out and facing reality is far from unpatriotic. So I'm going to assume I'm misreading your sarcasm and satire.

But he's dead on. So many Americans fail to understand basic history and why so many of the Great Nations of history collapsed. The biggest reasons being fighting too many foreign wars, spending more than they can produce, extreme political disconnect and lack of unity within splintering states.

Political disconnect is so easy to accomplish in times of peace it's rather sad and tragic. Most of the Samurai Code was written in times of peace (such as dying for their master at all costs etc) and we are falling into that paradigm as well to the point it's blinding us to the reality of our own real enemies. </rant>

Yeah exactly! Liberal patriots! Plenty of gun loving patriot liberals! I'm glad you agree! We're in the same boat here. This gun issues goes beyond the left and right. Only PATRIOTS apply here. These no gun sissy's want to take away our rights! If EVERYONE had a gun! NO ONE WOULD EVER DIE! EVER! What is wrong with all these American hating unpatriotic fools?

First off, being divisive is not the same thing as being uncivil. I'm taking this as you're surrendering the argument that Obama is rude and uncivil for a political leader, which is pure utter horsecrap. I have plenty of complaints about Obama; his alleged incivility as a political leader is utterly laughable. I don't see him going around telling people that if they don't agree with him, they're unpatriotic, not "real Americans", communists, fascists, socialists, and other nonsense. He doesn't scream "YOU LIE!" in the middle of other politicians' nationally televised speeches. Your entire suggestion that he's uncivil is partisan hackery. There's PLENTY I would criticize Obama for, but being uncivil?! Give me a break.

I'm not really arguing in the first place, heropsycho. The fact that you feel you need to passionately defend president Obama, even against the benign implication that he is impolite (the video I provided has many valid examples of this(I bet you didn't watch it)) is proof of the cloud of divisiveness that permeates his presidency.

More extreme left Democrats don't like him so much, so that makes Obama divisive?! Newsflash - they don't care for him so much because he's governed as a moderate. You know, the type of politics most people in this country agree with when asked without being mislead by the media. His signature legislation, Obamacare, broadened Medicaid rolls by a few million people, while limiting tax deductible benefits related to health care that wealthier income people benefit from the most, such as Cadillac health plans and capping FSA yearly contributions. It was the most moderate health reform being discussed. Put it up against single payer or government option, and it is remarkably moderate. Extreme left Democrats didn't like it? COLOR ME SHOCKED!

If Obama is moderate, why are all of his appointees extreme left? The far left should be pleased with his presidency, but the portrait they are painting is of a disinterested narcissist who couldn't lead a dog on a leash. Everyone drank the Obama kool-aid in 2008; they even controlled congress for two years. They should be celebrating Obama, yet there is a definite schism.

You want to know why politics is more divisive today than ever? We are now in a political climate where Obama is being criticized for taking out Bin Laden by political opponents. "Spiking the football"?! Has there ever been a more politically shallow move than that? "Man... he really has us by the political balls on this one, how on earth can we spin it? EVERYONE wanted Bin Laden dead, and we couldn't do it for almost a decade of trying, and now his administration got him... I KNOW! Let's accuse him of taking too much credit and excessive celebration!!!" Talk about manufacturing a conflict!

Do you know where the spiking the football quote came from? President Obama. He used the anniversary of bin ladens death to score some cheap political points against Romney, and so he opened himself to the criticism. If he had handled it presidentially, as a strong leader instead of using it as a partisan political play, Romney would have had to eat crow that whole week.

And please, the birther thing is ridiculous. Just stop. It was idiotic before he released his birth certificate, and after he released it, it's taken absurdity to a whole new level. It makes his opposition look even more brain dead the more they talk about it. Extreme conservatives simply wanted to latch on to anything that could disqualify him from office because he's not a Republican. Where were these people when there was talks about Kissinger making a good President?

So explain why the two examples I gave you wouldn't cause a reasonable person, let alone a paranoid one, to be skeptical?

And stop playing your religious card. If you'll accept whoever God appoints as President, then drink a tall glass of STFU, and stay out of politics. Where's your outrage for the GOP not making it a priority to protect the poor? That's certainly not very Christian either.

I'm not playing a card, I'm telling you what I believe. Last time I checked, I didn't need your permission to do that. Neither am I much into politics, personally. I follow it, but generally the choices are "bad" and "worse". I don't think the republicans are any better than the democrats, in many ways. The fact is, this nation has fallen far away from God, farther every day, and so I expect judgment will be coming fairly soon. Prophetically, 9-11 was a warning:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Isaiah-Judgment-Foretells-Americas/dp/1936488191

Sorry for the rant, but when are we going to talk about things Obama ACTUALLY hasn't done well with as President?

No problem. When you can think of any besides Bin Laden, let me know. I don't consider Obamacare to be a plus; my mother is going to lose her current health coverage and end up paying much higher premiums because of it.

>> ^heropsycho:

First off, being divisive is not the same thing as being uncivil. I'm taking this as you're surrendering the argument that Obama is rude and uncivil for a political leader, which is pure utter horsecrap. I have plenty of complaints about Obama; his alleged incivility as a political leader is utterly laughable. I don't see him going around telling people that if they don't agree with him, they're unpatriotic, not "real Americans", communists, fascists, socialists, and other nonsense. He doesn't scream "YOU LIE!" in the middle of other politicians' nationally televised speeches. Your entire suggestion that he's uncivil is partisan hackery. There's PLENTY I would criticize Obama for, but being uncivil?! Give me a break.

More extreme left Democrats don't like him so much, so that makes Obama divisive?! Newsflash - they don't care for him so much because he's governed as a moderate. You know, the type of politics most people in this country agree with when asked without being mislead by the media. His signature legislation, Obamacare, broadened Medicaid rolls by a few million people, while limiting tax deductible benefits related to health care that wealthier income people benefit from the most, such as Cadillac health plans and capping FSA yearly contributions. It was the most moderate health reform being discussed. Put it up against single payer or government option, and it is remarkably moderate. Extreme left Democrats didn't like it? COLOR ME SHOCKED!

You want to know why politics is more divisive today than ever? We are now in a political climate where Obama is being criticized for taking out Bin Laden by political opponents. "Spiking the football"?! Has there ever been a more politically shallow move than that? "Man... he really has us by the political balls on this one, how on earth can we spin it? EVERYONE wanted Bin Laden dead, and we couldn't do it for almost a decade of trying, and now his administration got him... I KNOW! Let's accuse him of taking too much credit and excessive celebration!!!" Talk about manufacturing a conflict!

And please, the birther thing is ridiculous. Just stop. It was idiotic before he released his birth certificate, and after he released it, it's taken absurdity to a whole new level. It makes his opposition look even more brain dead the more they talk about it. Extreme conservatives simply wanted to latch on to anything that could disqualify him from office because he's not a Republican. Where were these people when there was talks about Kissinger making a good President?

And stop playing your religious card. If you'll accept whoever God appoints as President, then drink a tall glass of STFU, and stay out of politics. Where's your outrage for the GOP not making it a priority to protect the poor? That's certainly not very Christian either.

Sorry for the rant, but when are we going to talk about things Obama ACTUALLY hasn't done well with as President?

>> ^shinyblurry:

>> ^heropsycho:
SERIOUSLY?!
Obama needs to be more polite?!
OBAMA ?!?!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qgce06Yw2ro
Not to mention a significant faction of the GOP accuse him of not being an American citizen. And that's persisting after he provided his birth certificate!
I'm not a leftwinger, or a Democrat for that matter, but you have to be out of your damn mind if you think that politics isn't civil enough because of Obama.
>> ^shinyblurry:
I'd like him to be more polite



Obama is the most divisive president this country has ever seen. Even top democrats complain that he is a terrible leader:
http://www.mrctv.org/videos/top-congressional-democrats-compl
ain-obama-not-leader
As far as where he was born is concerned, it's not as if the birthers have no reason to be skeptical:
http://ww
w.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/05/17/The-Vetting-Barack-Obama-Literary-Agent-1991-Born-in-Kenya-Raised-Indonesia-Hawaii

As for me, I accept whomever God has appointed. I pray for Obama, although I hope this will be his only term.

If I wanted America to fail:

• I'd build lots of coal fired power stations. Preferably right in the middle of major cities to maximise the health effects. Obviously I couldn't do it myself, so instead I'd just phase out the EPA and then let the energy companies do it. I'd tell people it was for prosperity.
  
• I'd just close the schools... no, wait, even better... I'd let schools charge fees according to their results, and let private schools compete with public.
  
• I'd teach the children that they live in the greatest country on earth, and they should never question that fact. In fact, I'd make it an offense to speak out against America... it's unpatriotic.
  
• I'd remove all the regulations impeding business. This would increase the flow of wealth from the poor to the rich, but I'd say it was creating jobs (and market crashes just happen, they can't be stopped).
  
• I'd phase out the metric system, see the point above, the United States of America is the greatest country on earth... and should be able to use whatever archaic convoluted system of weights and measures they like.
  
• If I wanted America to fail, I would prey on the evil already in the hearts of the Oligarchs, and convince them to just keep doing what they're doing. It's for the greater good.