A soldier opened fire at a U.S. Army base in Fort Hood, Texas on Thursday, unleashing a stream of gunfire that left 12 people dead and 31 wounded.
And to think...these people (soldiers) are the ones I want to have guns. We're not even talking random wackos in colleges or health clubs

Nothing can shock me anymore, I just finished reading on-line Those About to Die By Daniel P. Mannix

The Roman Games. And you thought they were just about gladiators.

Latest;

Federal law enforcement officials say Hasan had come to their attention at least six months ago because of Internet postings that discussed suicide bombings and other threats.

Right up your alley, bozo.

Shouldn't you be paying your respects instead of politicising (misspell?) yet another circumstance?

Myself, I consider military personnel expendable, but even so I can feel a certain degree of sadness instead of just seeing donkeys and elephants.

No, that process doesn't involve blaming the other side for the world's problems.

But I agree with them! Keep the Great Democracy's military white so that stuff like this won't happen!

Seriously, you hear about soldiers dying all the time, it's become routine. The guys killed were just another part of an ever increasing number of dead soldiers... Sadly, to most people things like this are nothing but words on paper and the victim has no face.
What kind of reaction can you expect, Wes, with an attitude like this?

You really start to worry when the psychologists who are supposed to be keeping us sane are the ones who go off the deep end.

We's been snoop'd

Islamophobia Strikes Media

No one knew on Thursday whether stress, fear, anger over mistreatment, mental illness or a warped understanding of his religion might have motivated Major Hasan. But there is a rush to judgment regarding not just this one Muslim but all Muslims, notes notes John Nichols.


Thursday's shootings at Fort Hood army base in Texas -- which have left at least 13 people dead and 30 others wounded -- were of course the "horrific outburst of violence" that President Obama bemoaned and condemned Thursday.

But, because a soldier identified as the gunman had a name that led to the presumption that he was Muslim, the incident inspired an all-too-predictable outbreak of Islamophobia.

News reports named the man who used two handguns in the assault on his fellow soldiers at a base that is a prime point of departure for troops headed to Iraq and Afghanistan as Major Malik Nidal Hasan. The major, who was wounded during the incident, was reportedly a psychiatrist who had served in the Department of Psychology at the Center for the Study of Traumatic Stress at the Bethesda Naval Facility in Bethesda, Maryland, before his transfer to Fort Hood. Hours after the incident, and hours after news anchors and politicians cited his religion as an explanation for the shootings, a family member told reporters Major Hasan was indeed a Muslim.

But that was hardly the only relevant detail about the major.

For instance, according to Texas Senator Bailey Hutchison, preparing to deploy to Iraq. However, the senator said, "I do know that he has been known to have told people that he was upset about going (to Iraq)." Several new reports suggested that the major saw a deployment to Iraq as his "worst nightmare" and recounted how he had treated victims of combat-related stress and was upset about the war.

Military officials at the base and in Washington refused to speculate about motivations or intents. And Paul Sullivan, executive director of the group Veterans for Common Sense, noted that the incident might well be the latest in a series of stress-related homicides and suicides involving soldiers who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan or are being dispatched to those occupied lands.

No one knew on Thursday whether stress, fear, anger over mistreatment, mental illness or a warped understanding of his religion might have motivated Major Hasan. The point here is not to defend the soldier or his alleged actions. Rather, it is to question the rush to judgment regarding not just this one Muslim but all Muslims.

It should be understood that to assume a follower of Islam who engages in violence is a jihadist is every bit as absurd to assume that every follower of Christianity who attacks others is a crusader. The calculus makes no sense, and is rooted in a bigotry that everyone from George W. Bush to Pope Benedict XVI has condemned.

But that did not stop right-wing web sites from exploding with incendiary speculation about a "Jihad at Fort Hood?" and a "Terrorist Incident in Texas."

Fox News host Shepard Smith asked Senator Hutchison on air: "The name tells us a lot, does it not, senator?"

Hutchinson's response? "It does. It does, Shepard."

Neither Smith nor Hutchison had any information to suggest that Major Hasan's name offered even the slightest shred of information regarding the incident at Fort Hood. What could Hutchinson have said that might have been more responsible response? She could have emphasized that the investigation of the shooting spree has barely begun.

She might also have noted that thousands of Muslims serve honorably, indeed heroically, in the US military; that American Muslim soldiers have died In Iraq and been buried at Arlington Cemetery; that some of the first condemnations of the slayings at Fort Hood came from Muslim veterans such as Robert Salaam.

"I'm sad for those killed and wounded by a traitor to both God and our country, and I regret that I even feel that I have to write something on the subject. Words cannot express my emotions and the instant headache I received when notified by my dear sister Sheila Musaji over at The American Muslim (TAM) concerning the alleged culprit," wrote Salaam, who served in the Marine Corps, within minutes after learning the gunman's name. "They have not yet released further details such as the motive but I will state for the record that no true Muslim could ever commit such a crime against humanity. As Muslims we are reminded that to take one innocent life is as if one killed all of mankind. Muslims are also commanded to keep their oaths when given."

Salaam is not alone in regretting that, as a Muslim, he feels a need to respond to the incident with an explanation of his religion. But the conversation between Fox's Smith and Senator Hutchinson reminds us why it is necessary to respond. And so Muslim groups have responded quickly and unequivocally.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy group, issued a statement that read: "We condemn this cowardly attack in the strongest terms possible and ask that the perpetrators be punished to the full extent of the law. No religious or political ideology could ever justify or excuse such wanton and indiscriminate violence. The attack was particularly heinous in that it targeted the all-volunteer army that protects our nation. American Muslims stand with our fellow citizens in offering both prayers for the victims and sincere condolences to the families of those killed or injured."

Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, declared that, "Our entire organization extends its heartfelt condolences to the families of those killed as well as to those wounded and their loved ones. We stand in solidarity with law enforcement and the US military to maintain the safety and security of all Americans."

Those are sentiments that are worth noting, especially by news anchors and senators who are in a position to inform the discussion of a horrific incident -- rather than to inflame it.

John Nichols is Washington correspondent for The Nation magazine.

http://www.middle-east-online.com/english/?id=35551

What? No reason for why the comments were removed?

I wonder why Snoop chose, to Mod only this thread ?

to remind that rules are the same for all on the forum.




because i notified to the moderators this thread.

What's this comment about psychologists?

Our resident cry baby did it. He didn't like what was posted, so he reported the thread (me in particular). No names please. We know who it is.

Local cry baby. We used to have a moderator. Now we have you as our resident snitch. Good job.

Remember, sh!t like this goes both ways. Watch your back.

The reasons should have been pretty obvious. Name calling, racist attitudes and general trolling are not tolerated on this forum Some comments were deleted because they were in reply to the offensive stuff though.
Anyway, as you know this section of the forum has a different moderator to the rest of SP although the main mods do have some power in here but we really only look in if it's necessary and if we are notified about something.

I know it's a big ask but please try to keep this thread and the entire section as on topic and civil as possible, thanks

Sorry, man. It just gets to me sometimes.

This will take a lot of investigation to try to explain. Looking at a name and immediately calling it a religious crime is not impartial.

There could have been a dozen other reasons for someone to snap that need to be looked into too, before again alienating a whole sector of the population on one man's account.

Alright I respect that.
Thanks for explaining it!



Agreed, my friend, agreed!

I slightly misspoke. The gunman was an army psychiatrist.

There is limited info available and the accuracy of it all is questionable. Regardless, this is some of what's out there and my speculative analysis (which can change as we get to learn more):

The shooter is of Palestinian descent and is Muslim. He was born in US, joined the military right after high school, went to med school here, and did residency in psychiatry (Walter Reed Army Medical Center), even doing a "fellowship in Disaster and Preventive Psychiatry." He is apparently a very intelligent and educated person. He was promoted to Major just recently so this guy had shown himself to be quite a loyal and competent fellow.

In July he had some poor performance evaluation. Also, it looks like he was trying to get discharged for several years, both because of constant harassment by military colleagues because of his ethnic background and religious affiliation (Apparently he had even hired a lawyer for that), and also it seems that he had become quite disenchanted with the currents wars after hearing some stories from the soldiers returning.

Most of my info comes from Wikipedia (after verifying the sources) by the way.

Based on this info, my guess is that this was not particularly religiously motivated. It had to do with being harassed for his ethnic/religious identity, being overwhelmed by some of the horror stories he was hearing about the war in Iraq/Afghanistan, being a short time away from being deployed to Middle East himself, finding it all overwhelming specially because he was identifying both with US soldiers (his training and current life) and Iraqis/Afghanis (perhaps through his parents, and religious/ethnic identification). In short, he was emotionally exhausted and he was aware of it. It seems he had been trying for a few years to get discharged.

The essence of the story is typical of many US soldiers who are burned out and want to return home or get discharged but can't. It is the reality of the current failed wars with no end in sight. The fact that he took out his frustration out on other soldiers instead of himself or random civilians may be related to the harassment issue and his identity.

Obviously he became a psychiatrist to help people, and he did for many years. It is too sad and very surprising that he as a therapist was unable to manage his own emotions, taking the lives of others so violently, and injuring other human beings. His difficulties somewhat explain his behavior but don't excuse it. Americans know that the wars are not going well and many innocent Iraqis and Afghanis are getting killed. Soldiers don't want to be there. Obama is planning to pull them out soon. What message was he trying to send? Or was it merely an extreme and irrational reaction to being bullied, a sort of workplace violence when the employee is fed up?

It is also too bad that a psychiatrist had to put up with small-minded bigoted people in the army eventhough he was there to help soldiers with PTSD. It is too bad that he did not get discharged despite asking for it consistently. And finally it's too bad that he will be used by the media, small-minded people and those with an agenda, as an example to re-ignite the flames of hatred and anger, create more hostility and spread fear, and remind the public of everything that has been going wrong since the September 11 tragedy.

sorry to have mentioned your racist comments.

I believe Tex was trying to tell you that no one likes a tattle-tale DAS.

Shame on Tex and every one who agrees with his childish comments............ for how do's Tex have the gall to cry like a baby when we ALL know he and his right wing lady boy friends campaigned to have the whole thread about a book review deleted just cos he did not like the name of the book , which was being used as the threads title

"our resident snitch" once again I say Shame on you TexasBlue and I say to those who follow that bully TexasBlue "no one likes a tattle-tale" shame on you.

and good on you DeepAtSea............. thank you

I agree, Juicy.
Thanks for that detailed analysis!

I laugh at these people that come on TV and say that these shootings could have been prevented if the accused person was monitored.

So what happens then?
You fire him for not doing his job well and then he comes back later and shoots people because he was upset at being fired.
Seems like a no-win situation there, pal!

when cable is on your side, you should realize that you were wrong

I'm sure you can't just "come back later" to an Army base after you've been fired....

I was in a heavily-monitored area of a hospital once (less than a day; what a joke), & it was actually written in the rulebook you couldn't return for 30 days after you'd been discharged.

On another note, the thing that got me was when I watched the memorial (how could you miss it; on every channel), & part of what was said was about the non-military parts of each victim's life. It's sad when anyone dies, so I was upset enough when I didn't know specific facts about each of them.

I agree, man. These people weren't just soldiers, they were regular people like you and me.

I think a sad thing to witness in today's society is the fact that the media reports the loss of a soldier's life more casually than they report Brand and Angelina breaking up.

I don't really know about the casual-ness of it, but they report on the latter more than the former, & that bothers me.

I know the deaths are saddening, & who wants to be depressed all the time?... But I don't care about the other at all. (If you ask me, knowing who Actor X is dating/married to/etc. potentially makes me less-able to believe their onscreen relationship with someone else, or other things about their character.)

Well it's the fact that you hear a news anchor say "3 US soldiers were killed in Afghanistan today by a suicide bomber" and that's pretty much all you'll hear.
Then the anchor goes into this large story of what some celebrity did or who some celebrity did.
On local channels, at least here in KY, the University sports team coaches always get the largest attention. Whether it's Coach Brooks for basketball or Coach Calipari for Basketball, they seem to be obsessed with them. In between the story, you'll find out that 30 US soldiers were killed.

It's like Soldiers are just seen as units that are moved on a battlefiel far away and when they die, it's collateral damage and just part of the process.
The human emotions are not present when it comes to reporting deaths of US soldiers.

An older sibling went to college in KY, so I know all about their ball obsession. However, I think they report it that way b/c of what I referred to before; Not wanting to upset people too much.

It reminds me of the start of the war; Everyone told me being anti-war was wrong b/c it didn;t support the troops. On the contrary, I'm anti-war largely b/c I don't want the troops to die as much/as fast as they are. (Ft. Hood worsens things for me b/c none of the victims were currently in combat/a warzone.) But they know the possibility exists when they sign-up.

people who sign up to be soldiers should know the high possiblity of having to kill enemy soldiers (who are other human beings just like themselves) and smaller possiblity of getting killed themselves.

In some countries it's mandatory to join and you don't get paid much. In US it's not mandatory and the pay and other benefits are better. Generally the likelihood of getting killed is also lower but there are exceptions.

Agreed with all of that... But I still say the thing that makes this situation all the sadder for me is that these people were killed on a military base on US soil, & I saw Anderson Cooper on TV saying there's no reason any of them should've been armed.

I've never been to a military base so I don't know how they police the place.

But to me it was shocking and not so sad...well, no sadder than civilians being killed during the 9/11 on US soil or Iraqi civilians getting killed in Iraq.

I don't know if you have any family members working in a US military base, and if that is the case, I can understand your concern. But for me, I look at all this and think this is why war and terror and hostility are so ugly. As long as we're in it, I don't consider any place completely safe.

I've neve been to a military base that I can recall either, & I can't tell you of any family I know currently in.

I agree with the 9-11 comparison, but not so much the one to Iraq.

As I wrote before, I think the people who enlist know when doing so that being sent-over, & eventually death there, is a possibility. But considering they know that makes me not as sad when it happens. What saddens me more is when soldiers enlisting to fight for/protect this country are killed while in this country by people who were working for the same military.

I don't see what the big deal is honestly. That's why I figured you might have a relative working there to see it differently.

Americans hurt Americans all the time. Yes right here on this soil. We have murderers, rapists, thiefs, pedophiles, gangsters, etc. We have people kill doctors who perform abortions because they think what they're doing is wrong.

If you take issue with the killer having Middle-Eastern roots, then that takes us back to the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, US's war against Islam (as perceived by some), bigotry, the killer's emotional issues, etc etc.

Yes, we need people to protect us and there are jobs like that, such as police officers, bodyguards, and soldiers. We also need doctors, farmers, engineers, janitors, waiters, etc.

Every life is precious. I don't see how people working in a military base should have higher protection than the rest of us. Have you heard about workplace violence or bullying at schools? Someone buying a gun and killing other employees?

I wish nobody got hurt but I don't think soldiers should get special treatment. They chose this line of work. But I'm not going to be more upset about some soldiers getting killed than some people dying of hunger and poverty or hurricanes, right here on the same soil. Nor am I going to ignore other human beings dying in Iraq and Afghanistan, but also China and Africa. There are people in much more vulnerable situations who get killed or die on a daily basis. When you look at the bigger picture, you see we're all in this together.

The reason they should get special treatment is they are fighting to protect you & me.

Face facts: There are people in other countries who dislike America &/or American citizens, so if we didn't send people to take care of them, sooner or later they'd be coming here, & if we didn't have soldiers to protect us, we'd be dead in less time than it takes me to type this.

These people (the soldiers) sign up to protect us, knowing they're putting their own lives on the line by doing so. That is why we should give them "special treatment" if there is a way we can do so, & why it is that much worse when our military kill each other in a non-war area, & add to that the fact that it was without ever leaving our country.

I think I understand what you're saying. But the point I'm making is that we have limited resources. And with these wars sucking up everything we got, we are faced with difficult choices. Quite a bit of money is used up by various security companies and their personnel as well. All these spendings, fueled by this culture of fear, have our hands tied, specially given current economic situation.

Choices? You just lost me. The choice (from an economic standpoint, which appears to be where you're at) is send/spend the $ to help the military overseas, or spend the money when they have to protect us after the people overseas come here instead.

Regardless, I don't see what the economic situation(s) have to do with the Ft. Hood tragedies.

Soldiers on military bases aren't armed. It's like going to a city. The people who have guns are the cops (military police) and whoever is pulling guard duty at motor pools (where tanks, jeeps, etc are parked). Other than that, you have to check out a weapon at the battalion armory. And you can't just go sign one out for the heck of it either.

I just wanted to add for no particular reason other than it was on my mind.......

This Hasan guy could've gotten out of the military very easy if it was bothering him to be fight Muslims. Hasan was a Major, which is an officer. Military officers in this country, no matter what branch, can resign their commission anytime they like. The only time they can't is after they graduate from military officer academy (West Point in Hasan's case). You have to serve for 4 years after graduating and being commissioned an officer.

He could have also become a conscientious objector. That can get you out or reassigned to duty not related to combat at all.

Another thing on my mind is some saying (not in here but the media) that he was being harassed for being anti-war or just being a Muslim.

Might be some truth to that. But here's a hard, cold fact. An enlisted man can not harass an officer. You're in trouble within a minute. If he was harassed, he was harassed by other officers. An enlisted man can go to the brig for f*cking with an officer. That, my friends, is a fact.

Just rambling. Your thoughts?

but wouldn't it still be a problem for him? he would still have the soulful battle of living in a country that is fighting with people of his beliefs. Ya can't escape that.
does he stand with his nation or his religion. he can't just put himself in a kitchen and hide from that.

Good point. Also, he didn't have to join the military either.

Makes me wonder why he did considering Muslims are supposed to be conscientious objectors by default UNLESS in self-defence. As a psychiatrist, there would have been many more outlets for him to practice his trade, the army would not and should not necessarily have been his first choice.

apparently he was trying to get discharged for some years but with no success.

How could they keep him against his will?

I never heard anything that he was trying to get discharged. Might be so, but i never heard that end of it.

One reason might be the fact we're at war. Maybe.

This is not as black and white as you make it seem. We need to take care of the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's a training ground for extremism. And the person who killed these people in the military base had not come from the Middle East, planning to use terror tactics on American soldiers. He was born in US and spent many years in the Army, helping us and our soldiers. He has Middle Eastern roots though. And this was not part of some organized and preplanned terror attack--based on info thus far.

You don't resolve these issues by building walls, spending billions in security and curtailing freedoms. Security is a necessity but to a point. You go to the root of the problem and also try to do prevention. Handling Iraq and Afghanistan badly is a recipe and almost a guarantee to face more terror attacks in the future. It also helps to mend US's image around the world, bringing back the old image of US as a land of opportunity, freedom, and justice. Also to help people in Middle Eastern countries become democracies. We should stop supporting dictatorial governments for financial gains. That way, we are not seen as the enemy, not to the people overseas nor any sympathizers here.

There are several million Muslims in US, close to the number of Jews here. Unlike Jews, they come in many races and ethnic groups. They are the facing more discrimination in US than other religions presently. And considering the various wars US is involved with and its unconditional support of Israel, doesn't it surprise you that we're not facing more attacks in US? Though many are unhappy and are faced with harassment, 99% follow the law and hope that these issues can be resolved through legal means.

So it does seem to me that organized terror networks originate in the Middle East, and if we can eliminate financial sources that support the networks and the major organizers, if we can improve our image by being more benevolent and helpful to the people in Middle East, to stop supporting dictators and help people choose their own governments, we have taken the sting out of these terror movements. They will perhaps persist but be as impotent as other extremist groups around the world.

p.s. I have written a couple of different papers in college on Muslims facing discrimination around the world, in addition to Chinese facing discrimination in Canada, and African-Americans in US.

They have to talk to him...there is a lot of "he said, she said" kind of stuff right now. This is from Wikipedia and you can check the sources:

"A cousin of Hasan's claimed that Hasan had been harassed by his fellow soldiers because of his Middle Eastern ethnicity. Said the cousin, "He was dealing with some harassment from his military colleagues. I don’t think he’s ever been disenchanted with the military. It was the harassment. He hired a military attorney to try to have the issue resolved, pay back the government, to get out of the military. He was at the end of trying everything."[23] Hasan's aunt agreed, saying that Hasan sought discharge because of harassment relating to his Islamic faith.[24] An army spokesman could not confirm the relatives' statements,[25] and the deputy director of the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council released a statement calling the reported harassment "inconsistent" with their records.[26]

In August 2009, according to a Killeen police report, someone vandalized Hasan's automobile with a key; repair was estimated at $1,000. Police charged another soldier, and a neighbor who knew both men said the soldier vandalized Hasan's vehicle because of Hasan's religion.[24]"

Anonymous harassment is one thing and upfront, in your face by other soldiers, is another.

Wiki is a good place to learn things but on certain divisive issues, it's not because anyone with an account can edit any page they like. I have an account and have edited pages but nothing political though.

As for what Wiki said in your quotes, this will come to light as true or untrue in due time because the military keeps records like crazy. The only thing they don't record is when you take a dump.

Oh I agree. That's why I always say check sources. I have read terribly biased articles on Wiki. That's why I was considering copy/paste the info from Washington Post initially, where the quote from her aunt comes from.

Not sure about the Afghan area, but the situation in Iraq wouldn't even be as it is if not for the mistakes of our coun try's previous administration. (Weapons of Mass Deception, anyone?) In fact, I myslef just recently watched a special with tape of a soldier overseas that included the day the Iraqis were supposed to start governing themselves (I believe it was) back in June; That soldier, & his brother, are both still over there.



I don't necessarily, believe that anyweher can be described as such a place, or should be treated any differently for that reason. That's why it's called "extremism", after all; If a person wants to think &/or act a certain way bad enough, they will, regardless of their environment.



Yeah, & odds are you could look for such info for another 5 years, & you won't find any. Part of somebody's smarts like that (hence the term "evil genius") is that if they are thinking about anti-American things, they'll work to hide it, or else risk becoming another Lindh (sp.?)-like "American Taliban", & Public Enemy #1 right here where we can catch &/or handle them easy.



Not curtailing freedoms, no, but these 2 help if done properly.



Prevention by definition is only a workable option before a problem exists.



How does "handling Iraq & Afghanistan badly" do this?



How about we help them govern themselves (which I thought was the goal), which means becoming what they want to become, not what we think they should be.



First step to that was getting rid of the old Administration.



There's 2 sides to everything. They attacked us first, if I recall correctly. I know that not all Muslims are anti-American, butI say better to attack many that are & some that aren't than let them all go & leave ourselves open to further attacks.



Yeah, but that goes with something I heard when I was younger: "Don't question; Just be thankful."



I covered that with the remark about not leaving ourselves open...



"Keen eye for the obvious" you got... But any ideas how?



I wouldn't say all are all that impotent, & esp.'ly not if they team up.

Right on!

I love Wiki for certain types of articles. Lots to learn there. Sometimes, when i'm bored, i'll think of something crazy and look it up on there and read. The bad part is all the intra-links that keep you on that site for days before you remember to go to bed.

Second step is getting rid of the one we have now.

We're fine now, & far better than we were 2 years ago.

I'm not in the administration nor have any powers or detailed knowledge, so I'm just speaking theoretically. And what you may perceive as "the obvious" is not so as some people disagree about how to handle the situation. I support a more diplomatic solution and had felt this way even right after 9/11.

I started to expand on my views only to put the recent shooting in perspective, pointing out we need better overall strategies, rather than focusing on more immediate situation and exaggerating it out of proportion. This reminds me of the issue with added security and all, after school shootings. At least those were more frequent than army base shootings and involved children.

In my view, once something happens frequently enough, we make major changes to how things are currently managed. Army bases, as pointed out by Texas, have their own police units. To force everybody working there to be fully armed based on this one incident (and the complexities of it) is premature, I think.

Your party will be in worse shape after next years mid-terms than the Republicans have been in the last 4 years. bank on it. You on the left can't see it. People i know who are centrist and independent voters are seething at this administration. I can't tell you how many people here in liberal Minnesota that i've run into saying that they didn't vote for this far-left bullsh!t.

But hey... keep on living in your hideaway. After Nov of 2010, i'll be laughing at all Democrats who'll be asking "What happened?"

I know you think i'm just babbling. That's fine. Come this time next year, it's going to be like a funeral parlor in these and other political forums.... the left wingers will be in their caves... avoiding anything and everything.

Not likely; We may not be holding the majority of the offices then, but the problem with Republicans is even when they are in the majoirty, each individual that makes-up that majority still thinks like them (if at all). Need I remind you that the Republicans are the reason we are in most of the wars & messes we currently find ourselves in. (I watch a lot of political TV & things, but I know the main prob. of Dems is they don't do anything to help themselves/make themselves look better, whereas Repubs. often actively make themselves look worse.)



I said it above, & I'll say it again; Indies & Dems can both see the problems, & I for one don't back it. Unlike Republicans, I also didn't help to create it.



Nah; We know what happened. The one thing both sides may have in common is the ability to see the problem. The differece is that Repubs actually see (& take part in) how to create/worsen them.



Whereas you on the right will be seeing the problems, & still creating more.

Oh, & re: Juicy... To force anyone to be fully-armed isn't just peremature, but a mistake to ever happen, If only those who police it were doing their jobs,...

Americans can forgive almost anything, but they will not forgive a climbing unemployment rate which will likely hit 12% with the billions of dollars in new taxes from this f*cked up health care bill. Most of the Democrats who vote for this bill and are up for election will not be in their offices for Thanksgiving 2010. I wonder if these Democrat congressional members can collect the next extended unemployment benefits like most of their constituents are getting now. It may get so bad that there might be a movement to amend the Constitution to require federal term limits. These Democrats are truly insane egomaniacs. They have done nothing to create jobs. They've done nothing. Oh yeah, they've spent, spent and spent. Most of their spending on the Porkulus bill was to their own special interest groups. Now we see how the Porkulus spending went... to districts that don't exist. Trust me, there'll be an investigation on this pretty soon. We're going to see who's pockets got lined with taxpayer money. The money went somewhere, that we know. It wasn't to these bogus districts. Somebody's account. But hey, they were going to clean up the sh!t Bush started. They're now looking as f*cked up as Bush if not more.

The Senate, the House and liberals in general have already grossly underestimated the anger and backlash of their constituents and the citizens of the USA. They all think this will be business as usual and the citizens/constituents will not remember anymore of this in two weeks. Wrong! They think they all have locks on their jobs and the people are just extremist noise makers who, at times like these, are the proverbial pains in the butt. This time they are wrong. Very wrong!

The "revolution" is coming. For years, our elected officials (all of them) have usurped more and more power, and treated those whom they allegedly represent with increasing disdain. In their sick, deluded, power-hungry minds, they no longer feel that they work for the people, having ignored every snail mail, email, FAX, and phone call and pink slip they have gotten. Instead, they work for their goals of a One World Order. You may think i'm joking. I'm not. This is why i left the Republican Party 5 years ago.... for the same reasons. This is NOT a conspiracy theory, but a reality which the ignorant fools who support the DemocRAT treason against the people of America are going to find out.... sooner rather than later.

I'm inclined to believe that besides getting the excrement out of Washington D.C., the states need to call for a Constitutional Convention for a variety of reasons:
1) instituting term limits,
2) limits on benefits and perks to elected officials,
3) eliminating lobbyists.

The post I quoted (the parts I quoted, which is all of it) belong in the political area, but have nothing to do with this topic.

Oh, & I disagree that Dems re looking as f'ed up as Bush, & it's impossible to look moreso.

Rebutting your previous post, pal. If it's political in any way, it belongs here. You don't make the rules, btw.

I never said the Dems are looking as fed up. I said rank and file voters (mostly independents) are getting tired of the dog and pony show in D.C. now. If you remember, independents give the politicians the votes they need. Partisan voters will vote for their guy no matter what in many cases.

Anyway... as you were........

If it's about politics, it belongs here, but you can (for example) be in Ohio & not be in Cleveland.

Regardless, from your post,...

"These Democrats are truly insane egomaniacs. They have done nothing to create jobs. They've done nothing... But hey, they were going to clean up the sh!t Bush started. They're now looking as f*cked up as Bush if not more."

Tell ya' what; I'll let you say whatever you want, & claim it's got whatever connection to anything else here you want, as soon as you admit you said what you said.

Oh, & as for that crap about what partisan voters will do? Well, maybe that's why we have the phrase "speak for yourself". I for one am not 1 of those "many cases".

Either this thread gets back ON TOPIC, or it will be locked.