published Sunday, May 19th, 2013

Military Justice

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

320
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.
AndrewLohr said...

Ha. And if this rape results in a pregnancy, you can do anything to the baby you'd like to do the rapist.

May 19, 2013 at 12:12 a.m.
alprova said...

Andrew, I know this is a tired argument, but if you were raped and impregnated, can you truly say that you would have any desire to not only keep the baby in your body, deliver it, and raise it in unbridled love for the rest of your life?

Since that scenario is totally impossible, you can't really say what you would do. You're on the outside, looking in.

May 19, 2013 at 12:25 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

Good morning, alprova, and Happy Pentecost Sunday (to all). "When He is come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.."

Some rape victims accept their children. My wife bore children in an abusive situation before I married her, so I'm looking in from closer than you may have assumed.

Women whose pregnancies raise problems who hesitate to write off their babies may try Choices Womens Resource Center, 423-267-7943.

Expound the justice of burning baby's skin off but not rapist's, feeding baby to a vacuum cleaner but not rapist, cutting baby's spine and keeping body parts around the office...Expound how murdering a baby will make a rape victim feel better...(I think Choices offers post-abortion counseling and groups among other services.) It's good news, and for me for reasons I see from inside, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners.

And there are some false accusations of rape: Tawana Brawley, the Duke lacrosse team...I think some of the Tailhook convention accusers had been to several Tailhook conventions (and one had signed a note to a man she later accused reading "You made me see God;" I don't think she was referring to his religious abilities.) Are false accusers of rape treated as rapists?

Repent from fornication and the rape problem will shrink way down.

May 19, 2013 at 1:55 a.m.
hambone said...

Maybe it's the way women in uniform dress!

May 19, 2013 at 6:10 a.m.
conservative said...

It is only quiet because they are reloading.

May 19, 2013 at 7:57 a.m.
MickeyRat said...

Ooh - how Taliban(ish) this morning Clay.

Who'd a thought Sharia would gain a foothold in the military before the socialist Muslim president had a chance to implement it on the civilians. Maybe that's why the DHS[Dept. of Homeland Sharia] bought all them bullets.

Allahu Akbar to all you Christian blasphemers on this sunny Pentecostal Sunday.

May 19, 2013 at 8:23 a.m.
patriot1 said...

Start using the military more for defense and less for social experiments.

May 19, 2013 at 8:25 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Guess what, patriot. Women have been in the military for a long, long time at some level or another. Rape is a problem in society, in and out of the military. It is exacerbated in the military because of ranking (think office power play only more so). This has zero to do with "social experiments".

May 19, 2013 at 8:33 a.m.
dougmusn said...

@patriot1: Sorry, people in the military are people first and military members second. I worry about people who do not interact--we call them sociopaths and I don't want them in my military, thank you. "Social experiments" from integration of the armed forces at Truman's direction to elimination of DADT and soon fair and appropriate prosecution for crimes including rape all serve a single-minded military goal: to get the best contributions to the mission from each and every serving military member. Furthermore, a larger benefit accrues to society when an exemplar exists showing minorities do good things (think, Tuskegee Airmen), women make contributions and deserve respect and worlds do not explode when gays coexist with straights.

May 19, 2013 at 9:12 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Wow. . . Good job, Clay Bennett. . . . I guess these mottos have only been for show:

“First of the First” . . . “Second to None”

“Integrity First. . . Service Before Self. . . Excellence in all we do”

“Honor, Courage, Commitment” . . . “This We’ll Defend”

“Semper Fidelis” . . . “Always Faithful”

May 19, 2013 at 9:24 a.m.
alprova said...

AndrewLohr wrote: "Some rape victims accept their children. My wife bore children in an abusive situation before I married her, so I'm looking in from closer than you may have assumed."

No you're not. You may be privy to knowing how she feels and/or felt, but you Sir have not been raped nor had an embryo growing inside of you that was conceived through an act of violence.

"Expound how murdering a baby will make a rape victim feel better."

Every child deserves to be conceived through acts of consensual sex. If a woman is raped and winds up pregnant as a result of that rape, it should be totally up to her whether or not to continue that pregnancy.

Feeling "better" about being raped is not the issue that needs to be resolved.

"Are false accusers of rape treated as rapists?"

False accusers of rape definitely deserve to be punished for their false accusations, but that crime is not an act of violence that deserves the same punishment as for actually committing the act of rape.

"Repent from fornication and the rape problem will shrink way down."

Sir, I am a Christian, and as such I have never considered committing any act of non-consensual sex with another human being, but you'll have to pardon me if I don't subscribe to any theory that fornication is even on the same level as rape.

Fornication is an act of consensual sex. Rape is not.

It's almost as if you are excusing rape as just another act of fornication and that you hold the belief that God would view them as one and the same.

May 19, 2013 at 9:31 a.m.
alprova said...

Men Are Raped Too

This article goes back a decade, but it illustrates an issue that the Military is loathe to reveal publicly;

"Vietnam veteran Greg Helle kept his secret for 32 years until he reached a crossroads in life: He was going to kill himself or he was going to get help."

"In 2001, the lifelong Iowan came to Florida to save his life. Helle entered a one-of-a-kind U.S. Veterans Affairs program in St. Petersburg designed exclusively to counsel men who were raped or sodomized in the armed services. At the Bay Pines VA Medical Center, Helle learned during his daily sessions that many other men had been sexually assaulted by peers or superiors in the military."

"Helle never reported his rape. He didn't think his officers in Vietnam would believe him. And even if he did report the rape, he was certain the friends of the attacker -- another GI who bunked across the hall -- would kill him."

Read the rest at;

http://www.refusingtokill.net/rape/malerapinthearmy.htm

May 19, 2013 at 9:45 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

At the risk of sounding insensitive, I think this is going to be a growing problem as women move closer to active combat roles. Soldiers have always put "pressure" on under-performers, right? No one wants weak links in their combat team that could be there to let them down when the sh1t hits the fan. I suppose nothing sends a stronger message of "you are weak, not respected and do not belong here than...".

I suppose if that woman was truly her attackers physical "equal" she would just kick his ass and put him in his place, right?

I saw some social engineer saying that the solutions is to flood the military with women. Great idea! In order to do that they are going to further lower physical standards so more women will be able to qualify. Our military is fast being destroyed by the social engineers.

I suppose this will necessitate the acceleration of all kinds of combat robot and drone development. Maybe we can put a joy-stick in the hands of all those wanna-be warriors.

May 19, 2013 at 9:46 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

I agree at least on one point. "flooding" the military with women will not solve the problem. Rape is about power, not sex. It has always happened and will continue to happen as long as people can use their power over someone else to intimidate or control. I am not saying we should ignore it, but our solutions need to be based in part on that reality.

May 19, 2013 at 9:51 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

How will that work out when females are routinely placed in combat teams? Will soldiers be allowed to use the old techniques to "select" their team? More likely, they will no longer be trained to expect excellence from every team member and it will all be about protecting the weakest member of the team at all costs. Soldiers will no longer be charging forward, but looking sideways. These are great days for those that will have to face the US military in the future.

May 19, 2013 at 9:53 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

lkeithlu said... "Rape is about power, not sex."

Exactly. Especially in this case. It is about the lack of power on the part of the victim (in some of the cases). Think about it lkeithlu, would you want someone on your combat team that you could subdue at will and have your way with?

May 19, 2013 at 9:56 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Especially in this case. It is about the lack of power on the part of the victim (in some of the cases). Think about it lkeithlu, would you want someone on your combat team that you could subdue at will and have your way with?

I suspect that this is the case regardless of gender. I would hope that good leaders don't do this, and poor leaders are identified quickly. Submitting to power is a complicated thing, and people, even strong people, submit if it means staying on their career path. Whistleblowers and those who fight back can be punished, and someone who has aspirations may consider abuse to be something one must tolerate if one wants to succeed.

May 19, 2013 at 10:08 a.m.
alprova said...

BRP, At the risk of sounding sensible, why not limit any decision to place men or women in combat situations, only if their actions are in the defense of the United States?

"Soldiers have always put "pressure" on under-performers, right? No one wants weak links in their combat team that could be there to let them down when the sh1t hits the fan. I suppose nothing sends a stronger message of "you are weak, not respected and do not belong here than..."..."

Am I to surmise that you feel that rape is a way to "toughen" a person up, in order to make them "stronger?"

"I suppose if that woman was truly her attackers physical "equal" she would just kick his ass and put him in his place, right?"

Are all men "equal" in terms of physical strength and their abilities to contribute to success in combat? I must have missed that every man in combat is built like Rambo.

It seems to me that a woman can achieve excellence in becoming a sharpshooter, a medical triage professional, a language translator, and yes, even some can hold their own against any man physically as well.

"I suppose this will necessitate the acceleration of all kinds of combat robot and drone development. Maybe we can put a joy-stick in the hands of all those wanna-be warriors."

And what's wrong with that? The theory that women are only useful in the kitchen and the bedroom is rather out-dated, don't you think?

May 19, 2013 at 10:09 a.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

On this beautiful Sunday morning, let's not forget that the Bible's Jehovah approved the rape of women, the killing of living babies, slavery, and the torture and murder of millions. Nothing like a mass murderer to worship and to talk about his great love.

Jesus as God says,"I'm going to create man and woman with original sin. Then I'm going to impregnate a woman with myself as her child, so that I can be born. Once alive, I will kill myself as a sacrifice to myself. To save you from the sin I originally condemned you to."

Makes perfect sense, doesn't it?

Quoting an imaginary Jehovah for support of morality is like quoting Hitler for support of concentration camps.

May 19, 2013 at 10:12 a.m.
Salsa said...

Change the character from the military to the IRS and you'll have an accurate cartoon for a change.

May 19, 2013 at 10:19 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

alprova said..."Am I to surmise that you feel that rape is a way to "toughen" a person up, in order to make them "stronger?""

alprova, I was specifically talking about women in (direct) combat roles. Of course there are lots of appropriate roles for women in the military.

I do not think women belong in (direct) combat. The few women that are physically strong enough are not worth the complications they bring to a very challenging environment. It does not matter what their particular role is in the combat arena, it is too likely that they will become something to defend. The effectiveness of a combat team is sharply reduced when any one member needs assistance.

It is really odd how the social engineers think they can manage away biological realities. Have you ever heard of the term, "the weaker sex"?

May 19, 2013 at 10:21 a.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

I think I have better things to do today than spar with people that think it is a good idea to put women in direct combat roles.

Have fun people!

May 19, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.
alprova said...

daytonsdarwin, your blunt assessment is an issue that has always puzzled me when it comes to the Bible.

What you wrote is very accurate, rarely if ever questioned, highly overlooked, and almost always excused by fundamentalists.

It's as if God practices the motto, "Do as I say...not as I have done." and we're all just supposed to accept that without question.

I consider it proof that the Bible is imperfect, not the word of God, and that it has been altered to the point that the works are full of controversy and contradictions.

And before anyone complains, any posts by conservative will be ignored by myself, as I know it is fruitless to engage with him on any issue.

May 19, 2013 at 10:31 a.m.
klifnotes said...

To be honest I'm really torn on this issue of rape in the military. I am a woman and also a survivor, so no male bashing please. However, I know personally of a few incidents where the guy(s) and gals were partying, got drunk, got horny, agreed to have sex and the next morning when sobered up the woman accused the guys of rape. And not just on one occasion, but the same woman on more than one occasion. The guys were ordered for court martial and went AWOL to avoid the charge. Don't know if they were ever caught and brought back. As over the years I lost track of the information, and it just all came back to me with recent headlines about the military/rape issue.

So, my take on the issue is, both responsibility and blame can be had from both sides.

And no the accuseds nor the accusers were anyone personally knew. I just have insiders' knowledge of what's gone on in some cases.

I'm not saying that forcible rapes dont' occur, both in the military and out. Jus that in the military, just like on some college campuses, there are other factors to be considered and, anyone, not just women, when you know there's a potential for danger you take measures to avoid the situation. You don't go into a situation where you know dangers exist, and you don't go out partying and drinking to the point where no one is capable of thinking and rational deicisions, placing yourselves in a situation where something of this nature or another is likely to take place.

I expect to get beat up for my opinion, but like I say I've long known of a some incidents where the above has actually happened.

I also want to add: The other concern is at some point the pendulum will start to swing against rape victims, with such massive accusations taking place without first devving into the all the facts and contributing triggers.

May 19, 2013 at 10:44 a.m.
degage said...

Thanks again Al, for ignoring Connie. He isn't worth the trouble.

May 19, 2013 at 10:46 a.m.
alprova said...

BRP wrote: "I do not think women belong in (direct) combat."

I seriously doubt that there are high numbers of women who would choose to seek "direct combat" roles, but I do believe that if they do seek such roles, they deserve to be given a shot to qualify for them.

"The few women that are physically strong enough are not worth the complications they bring to a very challenging environment."

And what complications are you referring to?

"It does not matter what their particular role is in the combat arena, it is too likely that they will become something to defend."

You offer this as if there was never a male on the field of battle who had to be rescued, who was in trouble or in direct danger of being over-powered by an opponent.

"The effectiveness of a combat team is sharply reduced when any one member needs assistance."

I again refer you to the reality that not all men are created equal in terms of physical characteristics, stamina, strength, or abilities to fend themselves.

"It is really odd how the social engineers think they can manage away biological realities. Have you ever heard of the term, "the weaker sex"?"

I really need to introduce you to my wife. She's a foot shorter than I am. She's 100% female, but I know well that if I were to ever strike her, she would kick my butt halfway across the state of Georgia, and she can do it too.

If she could not physically do the job, hand-to hand, she always has a knife within easy reach and will walk around any man in two seconds flat, gutting them like a slaughtered animal.

That woman, and many more that I know, are not body-builders, but have unusual amounts of hidden physical strength that would surprise the heck out of any man.

To sum this up, we are all human beings FIRST, and sexual beings second. There is no such thing as a weaker sex, despite any and all beliefs held by chest-thumping men, who feel the need to demonstrate their machismo, and are additionally driven to dominate all those around themselves.

Such behavior is common with Canines. I don't know about you, but I'm no dog.

May 19, 2013 at 10:58 a.m.
prairie_dog said...

The people responsible for an abusive military structure are the ones who sit at home and choose not to serve. One generation of responsible people performing military service is all it would take to change the entire system.

How about a few tens of thousands of artists, philosophers, writers, dancers, and others with liberal arts educations choosing to enter and serve in the military instead of waiting on tables and pissing their lives away on pipe dreams of stardom?

You want to see a difference? Make a difference. You are the only one holding back change.

May 19, 2013 at 11:43 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Rape is rape. Rape is wrong. I wish I could stretch it into 900 words, but it's the best I have.

May 19, 2013 at 11:46 a.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

prairie_dog said...

"The people responsible for an abusive military structure are the ones who sit at home and choose not to serve."

In fact, many choose not to join the military because it has become an industrial mercenary force, not serving the American country, but serving the war-mongers and war profiteers who are in charge. They choose not to invade and occupy foreign countries that do not threaten the homeland. They do not want to participate in the maiming and killing of civilians.

I applaud those who choose to live their own lives rather than be a part of a killing machine for empire and profit.

May 19, 2013 at 11:51 a.m.
patriot1 said...

Alpo says....."There is no such thing as a weaker sex, despite any and all beliefs held by chest-thumping men.....

The Defense Department disagrees, hence the different standards for men and women. Yeah, we all know you and your family members are all unique, but standards have to be applied broadly.

May 19, 2013 at 11:56 a.m.
klifnotes said...

PlainTruth said... Rape is rape. Rape is wrong. I wish I could stretch it into 900 words, but it's the best I have.

Yes, I agree. Rape is rape and rape is wrong when an actual rape has taken place. But so are false, misleading accusations because one opposing figure has a change of mind after sobering up or falsely accused an individual because the accuser sought revenge.

All it takes is for one or two false accusations to be proven for the pendulum to begin swinging back and at an alarming lightening speed against true rape victims.

May 19, 2013 at 11:58 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Klif: Cannot disagree.

May 19, 2013 at 12:01 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Rape in the military is a problem with no easy solution. The very nature of the institution, with its own code of honor and justice and its heavy emphasis on rank and the wielding of power that comes with it, makes it difficult to see justice done in the same way as in civilian society. Dougmusm said, "... people in the military are people first and military members second," but that's not really true. We would all like to think that is the case, but it's not. Individuality in the military is highly - and usually successfully - discouraged, as is almost any sort of whistle blowing. Even when soldiers are right about their accusations, they are almost always looked upon with contempt by their military peers, whether it's a matter of some soldier reporting another for murdering innocent civilians, mistreating prisoners, or accusing a fellow soldier of rape.

The private who first reported abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib was met with nothing but scorn from his fellow soldiers. Even his family and hometown hated him, such that he was forced to live in another city after getting out of the military. They didn't regard him as a hero for having the courage to stand his ground as an individual but as a traitor who stepped out of line and refused to follow orders. In other words, he was being a person first and a military member second, and he paid a heavy price for it, as does any whistle blower or any soldier who tries to assert his/her individuality.

I'm not meaning to imply that there's nothing that can be done about the high incidence of rape in the military, that we should just accept it as a necessary evil engendered by an institution that places heavy emphasis on machismo (machismo that is expected even from its female soldiers) and the "virtue" of following orders without question. But it will require some very difficult adjustments that frankly I don't think the military has it within itself to correct, at least not without sacrificing, to some extent, its own unique code of military "justice."

May 19, 2013 at 12:06 p.m.
Maximus said...

Clay, trying to change the subject are we? The U.S. Military is one of the most diverse, dynamic, and politically correct organization in the world. They will bring their house to order but will President Obama? Peggy Noonan in the Weekend Edition of that fine publication, The Wallstreet Journal, states in her op ed, "This Is No Ordinary Scandal", The IRS case deserves and calls out for an independent counsel, fully armed with all that position's powers. Only then will stables that badly need to be cleaned, be cleaned. Everyone involved in this abuse of power should pay a price, because if they don't, the politicization of the IRS will continue. If it isn't stopped, no one will ever respect or have minimal faith in the revenue gathering arm of the U.S. government again.

Clay and other brain dead liberal drones, Obama, as our country's Chief Executive, runs the IRS, the Justice Department, and the Military. These are his scandals and we as American's should hold him accountable. As many of us have stated in the past, Obama should be impeached. He has used his power to intimidate millions of hard working tax paying Americans and his corruption and utter incompetence should not go unpunished.

May 19, 2013 at 12:15 p.m.
alprova said...

patriot1 wrote: "The Defense Department disagrees, hence the different standards for men and women."

Oh...I'm sorry. I was not aware that the Defense Department holds the authority to determine that women are the weaker sex.

"Yeah, we all know you and your family members are all unique, but standards have to be applied broadly."

Sir, I never implied that my family members were unique.

If a woman wants to be a combat soldier, subject her to the same scrutiny that her male counterparts are.

I reiterate...not all men are equal in physical characteristics.

May 19, 2013 at 12:21 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Obama Aide: 'Irrelevant Fact' Where President Was During Benghazi Attacks. -Dan Pheiffer, White House Aide. Astonishing interview by Chris Wallace...urge all to read the transcript

May 19, 2013 at 12:35 p.m.
fairmon said...

From yesterday...I was only responding to your questions regardless of my personal opinion.

alprova said...

Your Q. What right has been lost during Obama's presidency?

Fairmon wrote: "The major right lost has been the option of not having a health care policy without paying a fine or so called tax."

I see. So by that, I am left to assume that you support the current system of health care, which only thrives if those without health care insurance and/or who refuse to pay for their health care costs, are allowed to milk the taxpayers through governmental payments to health care providers?

Assume anything you want to but not having the option is a right lost.

Your Q: What power has he seized? "He did attempt to load the NLRB with an end run that was found to be not appropriate."

That's a very weak example of a seizure of power. Recess appointments have been a controversy for nearly every President.

You didn't ask for a strong example. You don't think having your own people in control of the NLRB can yield results some find totally inappropriate? To them it is not a weak example.

You didn't ask if other presidents had done similar things. The truth is the president selects has cabinet and they can have a hell of an impact on how the departments operate. It is my impression that Obama often doesn't know what is going on and has no idea how to assure he knows what has happened or what is going to happen in each department. I don't think he could manage a business of any size much less the federal government which is larger than all major companies combined. I don't see anyone in either party that may be a candidate that has the KSA to handle the job.

May 19, 2013 at 12:38 p.m.
fairmon said...

I personally don't think women should be in a role that may result in direct combat. However, since there is a knee jerk reaction on the political front to allow it there is inadequate consideration of all the ramifications. The typical military justice system is not equipped or staffed to handle the increased and sensitive civil charges that may result. The day will come when some awful experience will have the same public that supported this decision joining those the did not in an outcry that forces those in power to make the necessary system changes. Is there one preventive measure that has been part of this decision?

May 19, 2013 at 12:48 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Raining at #MorehouseCollege commencement for #BarackObama speech. No Marines in sight.

May 19, 2013 at 1:03 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Listen to this comment from right wing talk radio nut-job Pete Santilli. There is a definite connection between his unwarranted, perverted attitude towards Hillary Clinton and the military attitude towards women in general who don't measure up in their eyes. Listen... and then somebody please tell me how you honestly think the military is concerned with policing itself in matters of rape. I'm sure that many, if not most, guys in the military who have heard this are high-fiving this idiot. The military is comprised mostly of low-intelligence, low-information, arrogant young chest thumpers with a macho attitude in the first place. You honestly think that rape is going to be seriously addressed any time soon? Not friggin' likely.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22dYeNaWyy4

May 19, 2013 at 1:44 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

So Roo. How many have ever even heard opf Pete Santilli? When I think of an over the top, warped, leftist, you come to mind. Kind of in the Ed Schultz mold. Maybe Laurence O'Donnell.

May 19, 2013 at 1:57 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

How many have even heard of Pete Santilli? Good point, PT. There are so many talk-radio right-wing wackos like him out there these days, spouting the same kind of BS, it's hard to keep track of all of 'em. They're like maggots.

May 19, 2013 at 2:05 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

BTW, thank you for the compliment. I like the gut-level passion of Ed Schultz and the intelligent insights of Lawrence O'Donnell. The fact that you hate them both only makes me more secure in the rightness of my beliefs and views. Just because someone is extreme to the left does not make them any more incorrect in their views than you so-called moderates/independents. It's laughable how you try to pass yourself off as an independent or a moderate, but every stance you take is extreme right. At least I have the guts to take a stance one way or the other and not straddle a fence and just cheer from the side lines like you do.

May 19, 2013 at 2:22 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

You're right, Ricky Ilyich. You da man.

May 19, 2013 at 2:24 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

I'm glad that you at least have enough sense to acknowledge that, Jack Dimwit.

May 19, 2013 at 2:32 p.m.
conservative said...

I am often astonished by the seemingly gross ignorance of Liberals when it comes to the physical differences between men and women. What can be seen in everyday life and what has been experienced by EVERY adult concerning the inherent strength differences between men and women is totally ignored by Liberals when it comes to women in traditional combat roles.

Is it just intransigence, hatred of our military, hatred of women or what?

May 19, 2013 at 2:37 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Raining hard where I live. Will be using umbrella. Marines are too heavy.

May 19, 2013 at 3:07 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Conservative says: “I am often astonished by the seemingly gross ignorance of Liberals when it comes to the physical differences between men and women.”

So what are you saying here? Are you suggesting it’s right that rapists are being exonerated and it’s wrong for the military to prosecute rapists? If so, may I ask if you’re advocating this policy for all criminal activity occurring within the military or just the crime of rape?

May 19, 2013 at 4 p.m.
conservative said...

mountainlaurel,

How in the world did you come up with your reasoning and your questions? What do your questions have to do with anything I wrote?

May 19, 2013 at 4:31 p.m.
alprova said...

Rickaroo wrote: "How many have even heard of Pete Santilli? Good point, PT. There are so many talk-radio right-wing wackos like him out there these days, spouting the same kind of BS, it's hard to keep track of all of 'em. They're like maggots."

Thankfully, this clown's exposure is limited to the Internet and that broadcast right there will preclude him from ever being picked up for broadcast on ANY radio station.

May 19, 2013 at 4:37 p.m.
alprova said...

Clearly there are women who would never qualify for, nor want to seek combat roles in the military.

But it is a false statement to conclude that EVERY woman weaker than EVERY man or that EVERY man is stronger than EVERY woman.

May 19, 2013 at 4:43 p.m.
Easy123 said...

You've got it all wrong, alprova. Everyone has observed the obvious strength differences between men and women. Don't you know that women have and will forever be the weaker sex? Men will always be dominant over them. So dominant, in fact, that we can deny them rights to their own bodies and decisions regarding those bodies. We can even blame them when they are raped. "They shouldn't have been there in the first place" we will say. We must keep women in their rightful roles as homemakers and pleasure givers for men.

I've been reading from my new book Women by conservative.

May 19, 2013 at 4:58 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

💤

May 19, 2013 at 5:20 p.m.
alprova said...

Fairmon wrote: "Assume anything you want to but not having the option is a right lost."

I'm confused by your inconsistency. You're one who believes it is wrong to seize taxes to be handed over by the Gov't to others for social programs, if they don't deserve such funds, yet you consider it a "right" for people to choose to be uninsured for health care expenses and to have funds paid on their behalf to keep medical providers solvent, again from the pockets of those who pay taxes?

I suppose in this nation, we all have a right to be a bum or to be financially irresponsible, but ObamaCare stands to hold people who can afford to be self-reliant, responsible for their health care costs, rather than to be a drain on the taxpayers all the time.

Pay the premium or pay the tax. What's wrong with that?

"You didn't ask for a strong example. You don't think having your own people in control of the NLRB can yield results some find totally inappropriate? To them it is not a weak example."

Every Presidential administration appoints people to key positions that they consider allies. Now, you're free to correct me if I am wrong, but those NRLB appointments have been in place for more than 15 months.

Has anything unusual or partisan resulted from those appointments? Has any business been harmed as a result of those appointments?

"It is my impression that Obama often doesn't know what is going on and has no idea how to assure he knows what has happened or what is going to happen in each department."

Well guess what? That does not make him any different than any other President. Each President appoints people he trusts to do the job of heading up each department, who can operate them without daily supervision necessary.

"I don't think he could manage a business of any size much less the federal government which is larger than all major companies combined."

You're entitled to hold that opinion of course, but the majority of America disagrees with you.

"I don't see anyone in either party that may be a candidate that has the KSA to handle the job."

In my opinion, no one ever elected as President walks into the job ready to take on the task. It's very much a learn-as-you-go position. The unfortunate thing is that by the time one gets a good grip of that which they need to stay on top of all the time, it's time to retire.

May 19, 2013 at 5:24 p.m.
alprova said...

Easy, apparently that is a good assessment of the beliefs that many men have of women. I'm sure that a few women would agree as well.

With each successive generation, such views seem to wane.

May 19, 2013 at 5:34 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo said...

I like the gut-level passion of Ed Schultz and the intelligent insights of Lawrence O'Donnell. The fact that you hate them both only makes me more secure in the rightness of my beliefs and views.


Ed Schultz: - “You’re damn right, Dick Cheney's heart's a political football. We ought to rip it out and kick it around and stuff it back in him."

Lawrence O’Donnell has admitted that his on air persona is an act that is employed to draw gullible left wing viewers.

May 19, 2013 at 5:44 p.m.
conservative said...

To conclude that EVERY woman is weaker than EVERY man or that EVERY man is stronger than EVERY woman is stating an unnecessary and obvious truth.

However, Liberals often use this canard to justify placing women who are weaker than men in combat roles more suited for fit men.

The standards have been lowered several times in order to put women in roles they are not suited for. It must be remembered and even understood for the first time by some that many men did not pass the old standards as well.

America has a more than needed pool of able bodied men capable of combat roles. Basic training should, as in the past, weed out the unfit,- those who may not be as strong as their fellow man or even some women. The end result should be that we get the best and have a fit military capable of overcoming enemy forces.

May 19, 2013 at 5:48 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Easy123 and alprova

Well?

I'm waiting?

May 19, 2013 at 5:55 p.m.
jesse said...

I wonder how many on here have actualy been in combat??

May 19, 2013 at 5:56 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Bob Woodward on Meet the Press lets loose on the Obama Administration:

“You look at the whole Benghazi thing. You look at those talking points and the initial draft by the CIA very explicitly said we know that activists who have ties to Al-Qaeda were involved in the attack. Then you see what comes out a couple of days later and there is no reference to this. This is a business where you have to tell the truth and that did not happen here.“

May 19, 2013 at 5:56 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Conservative asks: “How in the world did you come up with your reasoning and your questions? What do your questions have to do with anything I wrote?”

I was just trying to clarify the point of your post, Conservative. The issue that Bennett is tackling today is related to the unjust and the bizarre things that have been occurring within the U.S. military’s judicial system in regard to crimes involving rape.

Instead of addressing the problem and/or a solution you write a post rambling on about liberals not understanding that men and women are different, which puzzled me. Again, I was just trying to figure out what you were trying to say in regard to this particular issue.

So tell me, Conservative, do you think the military should seriously begin prosecuting or continue exonerating rapists? And if you’re favoring exoneration, are you advocating this policy for all criminal acts occurring within the military or just the crime of rape?

May 19, 2013 at 6:05 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Chris Wallace and Obama aide Dan Pfeiffer

WALLACE: with all due respect, you didn't answer my question. what did the president do that night?

PFEIFFER: kept up to date with the events as they were happening.

WALLACE: he didn't talk to the secretary of state except for the one time when the first attack was over. he didn't talk to the secretary of defense, he didn't talk to chiefs. the chairman of the joint who was he talking to?

PFEIFFER: his national security staff, his national security council.

WALLACE: was he in the situation room?

PFEIFFER: he was kept up to date throughout the day.

WALLACE: do you know know whether he was in the situation room?

PFEIFFER: i don't know what room he was in that night. that's a largely irrelevant fact.

WALLACE: well --

PFEIFFER: the premise of your question, somehow there was something that could have been done differently, okay, that would have changed the outcome here. the accountability roof board has looked at this, people have looked at this. it's a horrible tragedy, and we have to make sure it doesn't happen again.

WALLACE: here's the point, though, the ambassador goes missing, the first ambassador in more than 30 years is killed. four americans, including the ambassador, are killed. dozens of americans are in jeopardy. the president at 4:00 in the afternoon says to the chairman of the joint chiefs to deploy forces. no forces are deployed. where is he while all this is going on?

PFEIFFER: this has been tested to by --

WALLACE: well, no. no one knows where he is, who was involved, the --

PFEIFFER: the suggestion of your question that somehow the president --

WALLACE: i just want to know the answer.

PFEIFFER: the assertions from republicans that the president didn't take action is offensive. there's no evidence to support it.

WALLACE: i'm simply asking a question. where was he? what did he do? how did he respond in who told him you can't deploy forces and what was his president?

On other venues Pfeiffer said:

"Look, I can't speak to the law here "The law is irrelevant.

"What would be an actual real scandal in Washington would be if the president had been involved or had interfered in an IRS investigation,"

(So he is discounting all of the supposed scandals that the left wing was touting during the Bush era that he had no direct involvement in ... Nice to know)

May 19, 2013 at 6:12 p.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "Easy123 and alprova Well? I'm waiting?"

Waiting for what? It's over. Mind your own business!!

May 19, 2013 at 6:12 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...
<p>(CNSNews.com) - In his prepared opening statement as a House hearing on Friday, J. Russell George, Treasury Inspector General for the Tax Administration, said his audit found “clear evidence” that the allegations of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) targeting conservative groups seeking tax exempt status are true.

“Was the IRS using inappropriate criteria in its review of organizations applying for tax-exempt status?” George said. “Yes.

Was the IRS delaying their applications? Yes.

And finally, did the IRS ask inappropriate and unnecessary questions of applicant? Yes.”

May 19, 2013 at 6:16 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

JT wrote: "Easy123 and alprova Well? I'm waiting?"

Waiting for what? It's over. Mind your own business!!


It is my business.

You wish it was over but if we let this slide you'll try something like this in the future. Easy123 and especially you have declare that you can do this to any of us if we cross some line you personal set. People like you that use McCarthyism tactics like you did here need to be called out for their despicable actions.

Well .. are you going to carry through on your boasts are not? And neither of you should respond with "I already have" because you have not. Easy123 posted a link to a long list of names to chose from without any hint as to who he was referring to. You on the other hand provided some case number with no link as to where we could obtain any information you were referring to.

Your victim has given you the O.K. to post anything that you think applies to him so what are you waiting on.

Just do it ... Cowards.

May 19, 2013 at 6:28 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Bob Scheffer, CBS (yes, CBS) eviserated Dan Pheiffer.

May 19, 2013 at 6:29 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Like everything else the IRS has said about the tax scandal, its explanation for why it ended up targeting conservative groups turns out to be completely false.

Ever since the tax scandal broke, top IRS officials have insisted that the reason it started singling out conservative groups for extra review was because the agency was getting a flood of tax-exempt applications.

A review of application data by the Chronicle of Philanthropy found that when the IRS imposed its "tea party" rule in March 2010, tax-exempt applications had been on the decline — going from 1,751 in fiscal year 2009 to 1,735 in fiscal year 2010, which ended Sept. 30, 2010.

The number did climb over the next two years, but only after the IRS already had put a hold on hundreds of conservative applications.

USA Today reported this week that after February 2010, the IRS didn't approve a single Tea Party tax-exempt application until spring 2012, although it approved dozens of comparable applications from liberal groups.

Meanwhile, the IRS is still trying to pin blame for the entire mess on two "rogue" agents in Cincinnati who were allegedly acting on their own.

But the Washington Post reported earlier this week that "at least two other offices were involved with investigating conservative groups seeking tax-exempt status, making it clear that the effort reached well beyond the branch in Cincinnati."

Plus senior IRS officials knew about this activity long ago, but didn't put a stop to it or punish the wrongdoers.

And Fox 19 News in Cincinnati reports the four employees involved say "they simply did what their bosses ordered." Lerner also misled the public about the number of conservative groups targeted, initially claiming it was just 280. As it turns out, the actual number was closer to 500.

Even the claim that Lerner inadvertently revealed the targeting in the answer to an unexpected question at an American Bar Association conference last Friday is suspect.

Kevin Williamson at NationalReview.com suggests the Q&A was staged to break the bad news late Friday — a typical PR move to minimize coverage — and ahead of the expected IG report. The IRS, he says, encouraged the press to attend an otherwise non-newsworthy event and had several handlers on hand. Another account said Lerner appeared to look at notes when answering the "spontaneous" question.

Given this record of deception, why on earth should anyone believe IRS officials when they insist that targeting conservative groups was "in no way due to any political or partisan motivation"?

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/051613-656403-irs-scandal-false-claims-mount.htm#ixzz2TclGup4M

May 19, 2013 at 6:33 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Bridget Johnson -

“Long before the extensive questionnaires and document requests levied on conservative applicants fell under the scrutiny of Congress, Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) asked IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman, a Democrat appointed by George W. Bush who served through President Obama’s first term, “to examine the purpose and primary activities of several 501 (c)(4) organizations that appear to be in violation of the law.”

Wait! What! Shulman is a Democrat?

But ... but ... Bush appointed him.

May 19, 2013 at 6:36 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Jt6_quoque,

"You wish it was over but if we let this slide you'll try something like this in the future."

You don't have the power or the wherewithal to do a damn thing. "Let it slide"? Who do you think you are, lady?

"Easy123 and especially you have declare that you can do this to any of us if we cross some line you personal set."

Anyone can find out any personal information on someone if given a little information. It's not that hard. You've already crossed the line, remember? All traces of you were ERASED from the TFP and you were forced to take on a new persona.

How does it feel to get your nuts snipped by the local newspaper website? LMFAO!

"People like you that use McCarthyism tactics like you did here need to be called out for their despicable actions."

Spare us, Queen Blowhard.

"And neither of you should respond with "I already have" because you have not. Easy123 posted a link to a long list of names to chose from without any hint as to who he was referring to."

I already have. If you had any sense, you would be able to go through that list and identify the individual I was referring to. But, of course, you just keep talking.

"You on the other hand provided some case number with no link as to where we could obtain any information you were referring to."

So my link won't suffice, but you're requiring a link from alprova? LMFAO! Get real, psycho.

"Your victim has given you the O.K. to post anything that you think applies to him so what are you waiting on."

It's already been done, sweetheart.

"Just do it ... Cowards."

I love to watch you beg, squirm and squeal like the rat you are. Let me quote you once more: LMFAO!

May 19, 2013 at 6:37 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo said...

I'm sure that many, if not most, guys in the military who have heard this are high-fiving this idiot. The military is comprised mostly of low-intelligence, low-information, arrogant young chest thumpers with a macho attitude in the first place. You honestly think that rape is going to be seriously addressed any time soon? Not friggin' likely.


Yeah the military is definitely the low performer of all federal organizations. It is all because of the “low-intelligence, low-information, arrogant young chest thumpers”, you have identified, that comprise its ranks.

Don’t you agree?

You always cut to the core of the problem.

May 19, 2013 at 6:46 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Easy123

You don't have the power or the wherewithal to do a damn thing. "Let it slide"? Who do you think you are, lady?

"Easy123 and especially you have declare that you can do this to any of us if we cross some line you personal set."

Anyone can find out any personal information on someone if given a little information. It's not that hard. You've already crossed the line, remember? All traces of you were ERASED from the TFP and you were forced to take on a new persona.

How does it feel to get your nuts snipped by the local newspaper website? LMFAO!


You claim that all traces, of some previous poster that was me in a previous incarnation, have been erased. However I’m right here in front of you and you have no real clue as to who I am. I can state that as a fact because you keep making the same mistake over and over. That is proof to me that you are just blowing smoke or you wouldn’t continue to reveal your ignorance in this matter.

Want to try again?

Are you mad now?

May 19, 2013 at 7 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said ...

Every Presidential administration appoints people to key positions that they consider allies.

(However they don’t make it a point to do it illegally as another federal court has ruled in the last few days.)

Now, you're free to correct me if I am wrong, but those NRLB appointments have been in place for more than 15 months. Has anything unusual or partisan resulted from those appointments? Has any business been harmed as a result of those appointments?

(Yes there have been several anti-business and pro-union biased rulings but not to worry. When this issue is finally settled it has been projected that any rulings this group made that would not have been so made without these member’s votes will be stricken)

May 19, 2013 at 7:10 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Jt6_quoque,

"You claim that all traces, of some previous poster that was me in a previous incarnation, have been erased."

It's still you, sweetheart. It's obvious to anyone and everyone that has observed you in the past. Deny it all you want, but you aren't fooling anyone.

Just admit it...Coward!

"However I’m right here in front of you and you have no real clue as to who I am."

I don't know your real name or any personal information about you, but I know exactly who you are.

"I can state that as a fact because you keep making the same mistake over and over."

And I'm sure you'll stick to that story.

"That is proof to me that you are just blowing smoke or you wouldn’t continue to reveal your ignorance in this matter."

The only person here blowing smoke is you, Queen Blowhard. Everyone here knows who you are. There is no hiding it. Your usual tactic of playing dumb won't get you anywhere.

"Want to try again?"

Do you? I bet you will. That's kind of your thing. LMFAO!

"Are you mad now?"

I know you are. I bet you're steaming at this point.

Right? :-)

May 19, 2013 at 7:12 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said ...

I suppose in this nation, we all have a right to be a bum or to be financially irresponsible, but ObamaCare stands to hold people who can afford to be self-reliant, responsible for their health care costs, rather than to be a drain on the taxpayers all the time.


So Obamacare is all about not allowing citizens or noncitizens to be a financial drain on the taxpayers. Maybe we were all wrong about this and its concept could be applied to non-medical federal expense areas.

It is so refreshing to see that Obama is truly concerned about the tax burden on the people and not just an extending of governmental power over their lives.

May 19, 2013 at 7:20 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

hambone said...

Maybe it's the way women in uniform dress!


I know what you mean its like writing “Tea Party” on your non-profit application to the IRS.

Or maybe if you are the Ambassador to Libya and you go to Benghazi.

Doing things like that only makes you personally guilty for any misfortune that befalls you.

May 19, 2013 at 7:28 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

mountainlaurel said...

Wow. . . Good job, Clay Bennett. . . . I guess these mottos have only been for show:

“First of the First” . . . “Second to None”

“Integrity First. . . Service Before Self. . . Excellence in all we do”

“Honor, Courage, Commitment” . . . “This We’ll Defend”

“Semper Fidelis” . . . “Always Faithful”


The majority of the “men” in the military are so undeserving of American’s respect or support.

Don’t you think so?

May 19, 2013 at 7:33 p.m.
degage said...

Easy, Think I will call TFP tomorrow and find out if you have access to private info. If not I will want to know how you claim to know about changes and how they can condone your trashing people on this site. Al has ceased his trashing out of decency what is wrong with you.

If your claim to know the changes is just what you think instead of know, say so.

May 19, 2013 at 7:34 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

dégage...look up "sociopath"

May 19, 2013 at 7:38 p.m.
Easy123 said...

degage,

"Easy, Think I will call TFP tomorrow and find out if you have access to private info."

Go ahead. You'll be disappointed. I've never stated or brought up anything about anyone that can't be found through a simple Google search.

I can hear you now, "Does Easy123 have access to the ((non-existant)) private information of the posters on the TFP comment section?"

Person on the other line, "What?"

"If not I will want to know how you claim to know about changes"

What changes are you referring to?

"how they can condone your trashing people on this site."

I haven't "trashed" anyone here. While you're at it, ask them why they condone the hypocrisy, lies, misinformation and libel spouted by yourself and others.

"Al has ceased his trashing out of decency what is wrong with you."

Show me where I've trashed anyone.

"If your claim to know the changes is just what you think instead of know, say so."

What changes are you referring to? Say what you mean, lady.

May 19, 2013 at 7:39 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Plain_Jack_Dennis,

"dégage...look up "sociopath""

It'll say See Jack_Dennis, Rebus, PlainTruth. Right, Jack?

May 19, 2013 at 7:40 p.m.
prairie_dog said...

Dayton's Darwin,

Exactly what I'm talking about. You sit home instead of changing it from within. Cowardly, and diversionary, rhetoric to the contrary does not change the fact that citizen soldiers from all economic strata would do a better job of running the military for the benefit of the people instead of the government.

May 19, 2013 at 7:43 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Trying to be nice. Have not engaged.

May 19, 2013 at 7:50 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova

False accusers of rape definitely deserve to be punished for their false accusations, but that crime is not an act of violence that deserves the same punishment as for actually committing the act of rape.


Just as a rape victim is subjected to emotional violence the same doesn’t apply to those falsely accused.

I think that is your point ... is it not?

After all, once they are cleared of the rape accusation, if they are cleared, then their lives return to exactly the same emotional state and social standing as before. As a result the false accuser should not feel too bad about their lie or to be punished unnecessary.

Right?

May 19, 2013 at 7:52 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Plain_Jack_Dennis,

"Trying to be nice. Have not engaged."

So you get a pass because you didn't address me directly? LMFAO!

May 19, 2013 at 7:54 p.m.
degage said...

So search me Easy if you find anything I will know where it came from, TFP. How do you know, I may have been a poster under a different name and changed it. Guess if that is true.

May 19, 2013 at 7:55 p.m.
Easy123 said...

degage,

"So search me Easy if you find anything I will know where it came from, TFP. How do you know, I may have been a poster under a different name and changed it. Guess if that is true."

Are you drunk or something?

You'll need to type a cogent sentence before I can offer a response.

May 19, 2013 at 7:58 p.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

prairie_dog, You want to fight or just send others for your cowardly patriotism and flag waving?

It's not the height of military bravery to kill innocent men, women, and children. It's not in the best interest of America to create and extend an empire. That's what the military does best since 1955.

We do not have citizen soldiers anymore. We have a professional military/mercenary force, not defending the homeland, but making money for the McCain/Nelson/Leiberman madmen and other Congressional prostitutes and the war machine profiteers.

You can give your eyes, arms, legs, and souls to them, but I won't and I encourage no one else to do so either.

I look forward to the time when the rank-and-file soldiers wake up and say, "No more!" and resign from the war machine.

We are not fighting Hitler's Reich or Tojo's Imperialism. We are invading and occuping foreign and sovereign nations under a disgraced red, white, and blue flag.

No more destroyed bodies and souls for Congress, Lockheed, and Halliburton. No more broken bodies for a corrupt system of payoffs and profit.

These government actions are not just wars; these are the actions of a money-driven, power-hungry government trading blood and guts for votes, bribes, and profits.

May 19, 2013 at 8:14 p.m.
conservative said...

mountainlaurel,

I sometimes read BRP and Patriot because they are brief and often make common sense remarks that I agree with. Read their comments today and you may see why I wrote what I wrote.

And no, my short, plainly worded comment was not "rambling" as you charged.

You are entitled to your wordy comment about what the simple picture is saying. However, if you believe you can draw me into some argument about what you believe the picture is saying then you are mistaken.

Now, why in the world would you think that I would want to exonerate rapists? I can assure you that you will not stand on higher moral ground than I on the punishment for forcible rape and homosexual conduct.

There is a reason why I am a Conservative and not a Liberal. I must say that I am bafled by your lack of understanding.

May 19, 2013 at 8:27 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Conservative,

Are you a closet homosexual?

May 19, 2013 at 8:37 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

When Bob Schieffer pummels the WhiteHouse, it spells trouble. I know, irrelevant

May 19, 2013 at 9:23 p.m.
alprova said...

Jt6gR3hM wrote: "Yes there have been several anti-business and pro-union biased rulings but not to worry."

Cite them.

May 19, 2013 at 9:46 p.m.
alprova said...

Jt6gR3hM wrote: "So Obamacare is all about not allowing citizens or noncitizens to be a financial drain on the taxpayers."

Only legal immigrants will have access to ObamaCare, and yes, coercing people to be self-reliant is one key aspect of the plan.

Self-reliance used to be something that Republicans were all for, until Barack Obama and the Democrats took up the cause.

"Maybe we were all wrong about this and its concept could be applied to non-medical federal expense areas."

I'm sure you, like most people, would not have any issue with people who are able to work for a living, being cut-off from Gov't support.

"It is so refreshing to see that Obama is truly concerned about the tax burden on the people and not just an extending of governmental power over their lives."

If there is one aspect of ObamaCare that those with opposing views should be on board with, it is that it will promote the concept of self-responsibility for their own lives when it comes to their health care.

May 19, 2013 at 10:02 p.m.
alprova said...

Easy...please let it go.

It was very pleasant today until she just had to bring it up, because she just wants to stir up some more crap.

She knows that she is on borrowed time and has to play nice.

She's trying to get you banned.

May 19, 2013 at 10:08 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Conservative notes: “Now, why in the world would you think that I would want to exonerate rapists? . . . There is a reason why I am a Conservative and not a Liberal. I must say that I am bafled by your lack of understanding.”

As I said previously, I was just trying to clarify what you were actually trying to say in regard to the U.S. military exonerating all of those criminals. . . And as a political conservative, I guess you must have been really upset and baffled to see all those political conservative politicians vote against the Violence Against Women Act.

Jt6gR3hM says: The majority of the “men” in the military are so undeserving of American’s respect or support. . . Don’t you think so?”

No, I don’t agree with your thoughts here. I believe the majority of people who serve in the military are good people and deserve our respect. But I do think there is a serious problem within the military leadership in regard to this issue. Clearly, it’s not these female soldiers who are breaching military codes and ethics, and I believe the military leadership is letting everyone in the military down by not pursuing the individuals who are committing these crimes.

May 19, 2013 at 10:18 p.m.
fairmon said...

alprova said... Fairmon wrote: "Assume anything you want to but not having the option is a right lost."

I'm confused by your inconsistency. You're one who believes it is wrong to seize taxes to be handed over by the Gov't to others for social programs, if they don't deserve such funds, yet you consider it a "right" for people to choose to be uninsured for health care expenses and to have funds paid on their behalf to keep medical providers solvent, again from the pockets of those who pay taxes?

I suppose in this nation, we all have a right to be a bum or to be financially irresponsible, but ObamaCare stands to hold people who can afford to be self-reliant, responsible for their health care costs, rather than to be a drain on the taxpayers all the time.

Pay the premium or pay the tax. What's wrong with that?

Refer to your question which was if any right was not available because of Obama. You didn't ask if it was a good loss or a bad one. The results of the AHCA are yet to be seen and I am of the opinion even the most supportive will have second thoughts. The final regulations are still being developed and enforcement personnel have yet to be hired. In addition to the known taxes are a number within the bill such as a tax on joint replacement hardware. I understand your inability to be objective with the benefit you realize due to the AHCA being passed. The intent is good but this piece of crap legislation is not a good way to help those needing it most.

May 19, 2013 at 10:20 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

Easy...please let it go.

It was very pleasant today until she just had to bring it up, because she just wants to stir up some more crap.

She knows that she is on borrowed time and has to play nice.

She's trying to get you banned.


Easy123 I just can’t believe that you would let and old white man talk down to you like this without going into a rage.

However alprova is giving it to you straight because he knows you have little self control and as a like minded liberal he wants to protect you from yourself.

Please don’t get mad at him.

May 19, 2013 at 10:23 p.m.
alprova said...

Jt6gR3hM wrote: "Just as a rape victim is subjected to emotional violence the same doesn’t apply to those falsely accused."

A rape victim is a victim of violence. A victim who is falsely accused of rape is not a victim of violence.

Of course there is emotional trauma involved when one must defend themselves against a false rape charge, and any accuser of rape who has been found to have offered it falsely definitely deserves to be punished for it, but their punishment does not rise to the same level as one who does commit rape.

THAT was my point.

"After all, once they are cleared of the rape accusation, if they are cleared, then their lives return to exactly the same emotional state and social standing as before. As a result the false accuser should not feel too bad about their lie or to be punished unnecessary (sic)."

False testimony in a court of law deserves punishment. A rape conviction carries a punishment. Are the two crimes the same?

Perhaps you believe them to be. For all I know, there are some judicial jurisdictions that exact the same punishment for both. I'm sure that there are many who do not.

False accusations of rape are not at the core of today's subject, so I really don't know why some are even focused on it to start with.

May 19, 2013 at 10:27 p.m.
fairmon said...

"You didn't ask for a strong example. You don't think having your own people in control of the NLRB can yield results some find totally inappropriate? To them it is not a weak example."

Every Presidential administration appoints people to key positions that they consider allies. Now, you're free to correct me if I am wrong, but those NRLB appointments have been in place for more than 15 months.

Has anything unusual or partisan resulted from those appointments? Has any business been harmed as a result of those appointments?

The answer is yes. But if the court ruling stands they will all be repealed retroactively.

His appointment attempt, as you likely know, was very different than those by former presidents.

He does not routinely meet with his staff, at least weekly, and his staff does not routinely meet with their direct reports. A short meeting to communicate what is going on? What is being reported? What is being talked about and what are they currently working on? An update on active items. He depends on a summary of what is in the news and in various print media. I nearly fell over when he said his first knowledge of the IRS issue was when he was told of the IG report. He has said I don't know, I didn't know or keep in mind I inherited this or that, I can't get congress to do anything about this or that more than any president in history. I know we don't agree but he is weak and getting a solid answer is like trying to corner melted butter in a hot skillet.

May 19, 2013 at 10:37 p.m.
alprova said...

Jt6gR3hM, you are quite adept at stirring the poop pot, aren't you?

You knew that Easy has a sore spot for you and that he would respond to your postings strictly designed to see what you could stir up after a forum wide truce was called for and honored by many people.

Of course, you never agreed to a thing, did you?

It truly was pleasant until you just had to bring it up.

Ma'am, if you have an ounce of humanity within you, please drop it.

If you can't exist on this planet without the need to engage in destructive behavior, there are lots of places on the net where you can find people who will indulge you.

May 19, 2013 at 10:50 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Alprova says: “False accusations of rape are not at the core of today's subject, so I really don't know why some are even focused on it to start with.”

Yes, it’s sort of odd and has puzzled me as well, Alprova. I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many posters scramble to excuse criminal conduct. If you come up with an explanation, let me know.

May 19, 2013 at 10:54 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

mountainlaurel said...

No, I don’t agree with your thoughts here. I believe the majority of people who serve in the military are good people and deserve our respect.


Although this seems to be a more reasoned position I think I’ll let my post stand as is to reflect your earlier less respectful posts.


But I do think there is a serious problem within the military leadership in regard to this issue. I believe the military leadership is letting everyone in the military down by not pursuing the individuals who are committing these crimes.


When a military trial is ruled out without cause, its results overridden, or victims harassed then there is much concern for military members rights under the law. However the first two are rare and the latter hard to prove in court.

The problem in the military is the same as in civilian life in that there is a greater number of women that declare they are raped than men convicted for the crime. As a result it is very easy to claim the legal system is failing women without taking into consideration the difficulty that prosecutors and juries have in sorting out these kind of cases that many times involves only “She Said, He Said” contradictory testimony.


Clearly, it’s not these female soldiers who are breeching military codes and ethics


I don’t think anyone here has made such a claim so why address it.

May 19, 2013 at 10:58 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

I prefer this place more when it's roiling.

May 19, 2013 at 11:03 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

You knew that Easy has a sore spot for you and that he would respond to your postings strictly designed to see what you could stir up after a forum wide truce was called for and honored by many people.


You speak of him as if he were a child ... Well so be it.


It truly was pleasant until you just had to bring it up.

Ma'am, if you have an ounce of humanity within you, please drop it.


Are you saying that all of these below quotes were a joke or at this late date repudiating them?


alprova said ...

I knew about his little personal problem months ago. When someone else brought it up and he denied it, and given that he has again cranked up with the snide comments, I saw no reason to allow him to wiggle out of it.

but if he wants to continue with the snide, unprovoked commentary, there are people who can dish out the same, and yes...I'm one of them.

But your continued protests are doing you in on the issue.

You're getting a piece of your own conduct thrown back in your face. Deal with it.

You reap what you sow.

Quoting Silvester Stallone, "He drew first blood."

Jackie boy doesn't work for a living, and thus, has no position to marginalize.

It would be best for people to offer complete respect at all times for their foes, even when they feel safe behind a wall that they believe to lends to them any feeling that they are anonymous. That way, assault does not cross the mind of their enemy.

'cause the simple fact is, that you never know who has access to information that can pinpoint you to where you sleep.

Now that he's had a taste of what it feels like. It's all up to him how far it can go.

As for you, it's probably not a good idea for you to get in the middle

I provided enough details to HIM so that he understood that I was fully aware of his identity.

I felt obligated to pounce back because he provoked me.

Do you think he will do it again, after this? Naw...I think he will leave me the heck alone from now on.

Jack started this. I didn't.

He dragged me into it.

I was dragged into this. I did not start it.

to let you know what it feels like. You asked for it.

May 19, 2013 at 11:21 p.m.
alprova said...

Fairmon wrote: "The answer is yes. But if the court ruling stands they will all be repealed retroactively."

What are all these harmful decisions that have been issued by the current NLRB that are poised to be repealed?

I look for this one to go all the way to the SCOTUS and I am confident that the Republicans will be hand-slapped again.

"His appointment attempt, as you likely know, was very different than those by former presidents."

And so was the Republican strategy used to prevent him from appointing who he wanted to head up that agency as well.

"He does not routinely meet with his staff, at least weekly, and his staff does not routinely meet with their direct reports. A short meeting to communicate what is going on? What is being reported? What is being talked about and what are they currently working on? An update on active items. He depends on a summary of what is in the news and in various print media."

It's amazing to learn that some people are privy to everything the President does and does not do. How people know this is a complete mystery.

"I nearly fell over when he said his first knowledge of the IRS issue was when he was told of the IG report."

Is that so implausible to you? Do you believe that the President, any President, knows what every person in every Governmental department is up to every single day?

Do you remember the Iran-Contra scandal while Reagan was President? Here there were 14 senior-level administration officials who were indicted for selling arms to Iran and funneling the money to Nicaraguan rebels.

Did Reagan know about THAT? Investigations concluded that he did not. Eleven were convicted. Everyone was pardoned when GWB walked into the Oval Office.

And some of you believe that the President knows what low-level IRS employees are up to every single day? I can only shake my head and laugh.

"He has said I don't know, I didn't know or keep in mind I inherited this or that, I can't get congress to do anything about this or that more than any president in history."

No President in at least a hundred years has run up against the level of partisan obstruction that he has had to deal with.

"I know we don't agree but he is weak and getting a solid answer is like trying to corner melted butter in a hot skillet."

Pardon me, but you, like many other people, are buying into this Republican witch hunt and victimization of the man, that will never in a million years uncover hidden truths.

May 19, 2013 at 11:33 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said ...

False accusations of rape are not at the core of today's subject, so I really don't know why some are even focused on it to start with.


I didn’t bring the subject up but it seems you were involved in the original mentioning of it.


AndrewLohr wrote: "Are false accusers of rape treated as rapists?"

alprova responded: “False accusers of rape definitely deserve to be punished for their false accusations, but that crime is not an act of violence that deserves the same punishment as for actually committing the act of rape.”


mountainlaurel said...

Yes, it’s sort of odd and has puzzled me as well, Alprova. I don’t think I’ve ever seen so many posters scramble to excuse criminal conduct. If you come up with an explanation, let me know.


Well you have made your usual blanket accusation so why not be specific for once in naming those on the thread that that have “scramble(d) to excuse criminal conduct”

May 19, 2013 at 11:41 p.m.
alprova said...

JT...I'm not engaging with you over what happened yesterday.

It's over. It's been settled to everyone's satisfaction but your own. It's your problem to deal with however you choose to do it.

You will not be assisted by me and I'm rather sure that everyone else wants to see it sidelined as well.

If you care to hold serious discussions about the issues, then fine. Otherwise, I will ignore your personal demonstrations of faux drama.

May 19, 2013 at 11:41 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said ...

And so was the Republican strategy used to prevent him from appointing who he wanted to head up that agency as well.


From the NYT:

Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, began using pro forma sessions, lasting just seconds, in late 2007 to keep the Senate nominally in session and prevent President George W. Bush from making recess appointments.

May 19, 2013 at 11:46 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

JT...I'm not engaging with you over what happened yesterday.

It's over. It's been settled to everyone's satisfaction but your own. It's your problem to deal with however you choose to do it.

You will not be assisted by me and I'm rather sure that everyone else wants to see it sidelined as well.

If you care to hold serious discussions about the issues, then fine. Otherwise, I will ignore your personal demonstrations of faux drama.


So your answer is "No" that you will not repudiate the threats and smears you made yesterday.

It's what I thought you would do.

May 19, 2013 at 11:49 p.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, began using pro forma sessions, lasting just seconds, in late 2007 to keep the Senate nominally in session and prevent President George W. Bush from making recess appointments."

Please take note of the fact that I never said that it had never been done before. Fairmon stated that what the President had done was "different."

I'm so glad that we agree that this tactic is quite novel and has only been recently used to prevent recess appointments by Presidents.

His recess appointments will stand. Watch and see.

May 19, 2013 at 11:57 p.m.
Easy123 said...

jt6_quoque,

You never answered: How did it feel to get your nuts clipped by the TFP?

Must have been a real shot to your ego to get put in your place like that. It'll be alright, old gal. Just keep toeing that line... :-)

May 19, 2013 at 11:57 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova you said it was "very different", yet it was the same

May 20, 2013 at 12:02 a.m.
dude_abides said...

"According to the survey, which was conducted Friday and Saturday, 53% of Americans say they approve of the job the president is doing, with 45% saying they disapprove. The president's approval rating was at 51% in CNN's last poll, which was conducted in early April."

Seems like everything is "impeachy keen!" Thanx for the bumps, chumps. When throwing sh!t, don't stand in a circle. Crass dismissed.

May 20, 2013 at 12:06 a.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "So your answer is "No" that you will not repudiate the threats and smears you made yesterday."

I did not threaten anyone. I have nothing to repudiate.

"It's what I thought you would do."

Ma'am. You're meddling in something that should have never concerned you at all.

Your continued involvement in what happened yesterday, in light of the fact that everyone else desires it to be water under the bridge, is quite perplexing.

Please...mind your own business, let it go, and everything will be fine.

May 20, 2013 at 12:07 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Everyone here knows Easy is an insane liar. I'm not too sure the same can't be said of Alpo. He knows damn well their digging got information about someone other than me. Alpo comes on as a reasonable person, but down deep he's as dirty as the insane one. I genuinely hope people on here are not taken in by this poser.

May 20, 2013 at 12:07 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Today commentary: this stuff is just wrong... It will take more than firing a few temps and low level bureaucrats to fix it #AP #IRS #ftn -Bob Schieffer

May 20, 2013 at 12:11 a.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

PlainTruth said...

Everyone here knows Easy is an insane liar. I'm not too sure the same can't be said of Alpo. He knows damn well their digging got information about someone other than me. Alpo comes on as a reasonable person, but down deep he's as dirty as the insane one. I genuinely hope people on here are not taken in by this poser.


alprova, it sure looks like its not over.

May 20, 2013 at 12:14 a.m.
alprova said...

dude_abides wrote: "Seems like everything is "impeachy keen!" Thanx for the bumps, chumps. When throwing sh!t, don't stand in a circle. Crass dismissed."

What's really going to fry the minds of so many, is that in three and a half years, I would not be surprised to see his outgoing approval ratings the highest of any second-term President in decades, which will make for an easy victory for Mrs. Clinton.

Americans love to root for the Underdog.

May 20, 2013 at 12:17 a.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

dude_abides said...

"According to the survey, which was conducted Friday and Saturday, 53% of Americans say they approve of the job the president is doing, with 45% saying they disapprove. The president's approval rating was at 51% in CNN's last poll, which was conducted in early April."

Seems like everything is "impeachy keen!" Thanx for the bumps, chumps. When throwing sh!t, don't stand in a circle. Crass dismissed.


A week ago the RCP average had Obama at +3.2 and as of today they have him at + 2.5 a loss of .7 in one bad week.

May 20, 2013 at 12:17 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

I don't recall getting an apology from His Alponess. When I do, I may drop it. (I don't expect one from the sociopath)

May 20, 2013 at 12:18 a.m.
alprova said...

Any poll's accuracy depends strictly on the political preference of those who respond.

Polls have shown that if more Republican leaning people respond, the approval numbers will be low.

Fox News polls are clearly responded to by more Republicans, therefore they always show low approval numbers.

The true test of the approval that the Americans have of the President came last November the 6th.

And some people have been whining ever since.

May 20, 2013 at 12:26 a.m.
alprova said...

PT wrote: "I don't recall getting an apology from His Alponess."

Have you ever once apologized for any one of your personal and unprovoked attacks on anyone? Yet you expect me to apologize for biting back?

No offense, but you have some nerve demanding an apology from anyone after some of the stuff you have written.

"When I do, I may drop it."

I don't care what you do to anyone else, but I'm betting that you will keep your snarky comments about me to yourself in the future, unless the case may be that you have an affinity for flagellation.

May 20, 2013 at 12:37 a.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

daytonsdarwin said...

Quoting an imaginary Jehovah for support of morality is like quoting Hitler for support of concentration camps.


Jehovah supports morality and Hitler supports concentration camps?

Are you sure?

I was thinking this would better fit what you wanted “Jehovah for support of morality is like quoting Hitler for support of Passover”.

But that’s just me .... As for you who knows.

May 20, 2013 at 12:39 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

So Alpo. Me being snarky and calling you a gasbag, bloviator, and so forth is grounds for what you and the deranged one did? I kind of don't see the equivalency there, Mr. Prova.

May 20, 2013 at 12:42 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

And BTW, Mr. Prova. A word of advice. You need to find a better class of punk to hang with.

May 20, 2013 at 12:46 a.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

PT wrote: "I don't recall getting an apology from His Alponess."

Have you ever once apologized for any one of your personal and unprovoked attacks on anyone? Yet you expect me to apologize for biting back?

No offense, but you have some nerve demanding an apology from anyone after some of the stuff you have written.

"When I do, I may drop it."

I don't care what you do to anyone else, but I'm betting that you will keep your snarky comments about me to yourself in the future, unless the case may be that you have an affinity for flagellation.


Everybody here participates in the “art of the snark” and everybody lets it slide for the most part. However you and Easy123 crossed the line by attempting to dig up personal dirt on another poster to silence him or drive him away.

When others wanted to address this attack you threatened them as well and now even though you keep saying its over you once again threaten Plain Truth.

May 20, 2013 at 12:52 a.m.
alprova said...

PT wrote: "So Alpo. Me being snarky and calling you a gasbag, bloviator, and so forth is grounds for what you and the deranged one did?"

Easy had his own reasons. I do not know what they were.

As for me, I was content to leave you to your little two-line postings forever and a day. Since your return, you were doing marvelous at limiting them to condemnations of the President and politicians.

The other day, you decided to return to your old tricks and began the snarky comments directed at participants in this forum. You singled me out totally out of nowhere and for no reason.

So...yes. I bit back and with a vengeance.

"I kind of don't see the equivalency there, Mr. Prova."

If that's where you are at, then I don't expect that you have learned a thing from it.

I'll type it again. Read it carefully. You leave me alone and I'll be quite content to return the favor.

If you are determined to not leave me alone, then expect a cyber-spanking from a man who knows how to dish them out quite effectively.

This is not my first rodeo.

May 20, 2013 at 12:56 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

ALPO: You funny. Off to bed.

May 20, 2013 at 12:58 a.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

Any poll's accuracy depends strictly on the political preference of those who respond.

(You seemed to like and trust the poll numbers when dude_abides posted them.)

Polls have shown that if more Republican leaning people respond, the approval numbers will be low.

(Are you so ignorant of the science of polling that you feel they don’t take that into account and compensate for such imbalances)

Fox News polls are clearly responded to by more Republicans, therefore they always show low approval numbers.

(The RCP average is not a Fox News poll)

May 20, 2013 at 1 a.m.
alprova said...

PT wrote: "And BTW, Mr. Prova. A word of advice. You need to find a better class of punk to hang with."

I don't "hang with" him anymore than I hang with you.

And since we're handing out unsolicited advice, permit me to offer some to you.

I'll just bet if you left him alone, you would find that he would do the same to you.

What have you got to lose by trying it?

May 20, 2013 at 1:01 a.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said ...

If you are determined to not leave me alone, then expect a cyber-spanking from a man who knows how to dish them out quite effectively.

This is not my first rodeo.


Yeah its over.

If nothing else you are good to your word about things like that .. aren't you?

If the rest of us don't toe the line when it comes to your rules then we can expect you and your little helper to make every attempt to obtain whatever dirt you can on us to make us bend to your will.

Just remember its a two way street and you have provided a great deal of personal information for anyone(?) who may want to connect it all together.

See it is not just like calling each other fools and idiots until our finger tips bleed. It can cause some people a great deal of grief.

May 20, 2013 at 1:10 a.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "Everybody here participates in the “art of the snark” and everybody lets it slide for the most part. However you and Easy123 crossed the line by attempting to dig up personal dirt on another poster to silence him or drive him away."

You're determined to keep involving yourself in something that doesn't concern you for one minute, aren't you?

It's not going to happen. Mind your own business.

"When others wanted to address this attack you threatened them as well and now even though you keep saying its over you once again threaten Plain Truth."

Ma'am, you're forgetting what and who started what happened yesterday. You were banned for similar behavior. I would think that you would prefer to sit on the sidelines and stick to the issues.

Old habits are hard to break, aren't they?

May 20, 2013 at 1:14 a.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "You seemed to like and trust the poll numbers when dude_abides posted them."

Actually, I didn't even opine on the poll, but don't let that stop you from your current quest to controvert anything and everything I write.

"Are you so ignorant of the science of polling that you feel they don’t take that into account and compensate for such imbalances"

Sweetheart, I have written many times that one of my pert-time ventures is with a local firm that conducts political polls.

There is no scientific method on the books for assuring that the respondents to any poll, regardless of how they are conducted, assure any balanced responses. It's hit and miss at best.

"The RCP average is not a Fox News poll"

Precisely. RCP, for as much as they average the results of many polls, is not the authoritative entity for determining with accuracy the public approval of the President.

They are one of many.

You believe the Prez has been hurt by all this negative attention by the Republicans. So what?

Let's be sure to revisit this next November and following the elections of 2016, when the events of the past few weeks will be a distant memory in the minds of the voters.

One of us will be right and one of us will be wrong.

Until then, weekly fluctuations in approval numbers are quite meaningless.

May 20, 2013 at 1:31 a.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

It looks like some people are getting testy about being lied to:

DAN PFEIFFER, SENIOR WHITE HOUSE ADVISOR: The point that our Chief of Staff is making is that this is the Republican playbook here which is try, when they don't have a positive agenda, try to drag Washington into a swamp of partisan fishing expeditions, trumped up hearings and false allegations. We're not going to let that distract us and the President from actually doing the people's work and fighting for the middle class.

BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST: You know, I don’t want to compare this in any way to Watergate. I do not think this is Watergate by any stretch. But you weren't born then I would guess, but I have to tell you that is exactly the approach that the Nixon administration took. They said, “These are all second-rate things. We don't have time for this. We have to devote our time to the people's business.” You’re taking exactly the same line they did.

SCHIEFFER: But Mr. Pfeiffer, and I don't mean to be argumentative here, but the President is in charge of the executive branch of the government. It’s my, I'll just make this as an assertion: when the executive branch does things right, there doesn't seem to be any hesitancy of the White House to take credit for that. When Osama bin Laden was killed, the President didn't waste any time getting out there and telling people about it.

But with all of these things, when these things happen, you seem to send out officials many times who don't even seem to know what has happened. And I use as an example of that Susan Rice who had no connection whatsoever to the events that took place in Benghazi, and yet she was sent out, appeared on this broadcast, and other Sunday broadcasts, five days after it happens, and I'm not here to get in an argument with you about who changed which word in the talking points and all that. The bottom line is what she told the American people that day bore no resemblance to what had happened on the ground in an incident where four Americans were killed.

SCHIEFFER: But what I'm saying to you is that was just PR. That was just a PR plan to send out somebody who didn't know anything about what had happened. Why did you do that? Why didn't the Secretary of State come and tell us what they knew and if he knew nothing say, “We don't know yet?” Why didn't the White House Chief of Staff come out? I mean I would, and I mean this as no disrespect to you, why are you here today? Why isn't the White House Chief of Staff here to tell us what happened?

May 20, 2013 at 1:40 a.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "Yeah its over."

Good.

"If nothing else you are good to your word about things like that .. aren't you?"

I'm glad you agree.

"If the rest of us don't toe the line when it comes to your rules then we can expect you and your little helper to make every attempt to obtain whatever dirt you can on us to make us bend to your will."

I do my own shoveling sweetie. I wouldn't know easy if I passed him on the street.

"Just remember its a two way street and you have provided a great deal of personal information for anyone(?) who may want to connect it all together."

No problem. I'm not hard to find at all. I've got nothing to hide nor nothing to fear from someone who may have the desire to do me in.

I'm living on borrowed time as it is.

"Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil: for thou art with me; thy rod and thy staff they comfort me."

"See it is not just like calling each other fools and idiots until our finger tips bleed. It can cause some people a great deal of grief."

Sounds to me that you have some reason for hiding behind your wall of anonymity and the fact that someone else's wall was breached who is just as secretive has you a bit worried.

You're not much of a sleuth, or you would have figured out how it was that two people were able to stumble onto public information with little effort at all.

May 20, 2013 at 1:53 a.m.
patriot1 said...

The VA says 1 in 5 women and 1 in 100 men screen positive for military sexual trauma, which the VA defines as "any sexual activity where you are involved against your will." Some report that they were victims of rape, while others say they were groped or subjected to verbal abuse or other forms of sexual harassment.

This AP article states that 20% of women screen positive for military sexual trauma....this could be anywhere from rape to what could be perceived as an offensive joke or off color (not race, Alpo) remark. Boy, what a wide net.

May 20, 2013 at 5:21 a.m.
dougmusn said...

@patriot1: There is no argument individuality is quashed in the military IN THE PERFORMANCE OF YOUR DUTIES, hence the scorn onto the Abu Graiab reporter. But individuality outside of gang activity or hate crime activity is not so constrained. When on liberty and especially with alcoholic disinhibition involved, individuality reasserts itself mightily.

May 20, 2013 at 5:35 a.m.
patriot1 said...

In the final six months of 2011, an average of 248 veterans per month filed for disability benefits related to sexual trauma. That rose by about a third, to 334 veterans per month in 2012, an increase the VA attributed in part to better screening for the ongoing trauma associated with sexual assault. - AP

This seems ripe for abuse....follow the money.

May 20, 2013 at 5:39 a.m.
fairmon said...

alprova said..

Is that so implausible to you? Do you believe that the President, any President, knows what every person in every Governmental department is up to every single day?

I didn't even hint that he should know everything. However, as many people around him knew about the IRS behavior and a plan to reveal it in an orchestrated press conference it is not unrealistic to expect him to know about it before the IG report.

Defending Obama is like an offensive lineman blocking for a QB on a pass play that never throws the ball.

We can agree you think he is great and I think he is a weak manager. His limited experience at anything not political is obvious. His ratings are no surprise since most people react to the photo ops and sound bites talking points his handlers orchestrate very well.

May 20, 2013 at 6:53 a.m.
conservative said...

mountainlaurel,

"As I said previously, I was just trying to clarify what you were actually trying to say in regard to the U.S. military exonerating all of those criminals. . . And as a political conservative, I guess you must have been really upset and baffled to see all those political conservative politicians vote against the Violence Against Women Act."

============

I was not trying to say anything at all about the "military exonerating all of those criminals," and there is not even a hint in my comment that I was.

May 20, 2013 at 7:17 a.m.
alprova said...

mountainlaurel, what conservative stated was that liberals are too ignorant to understand that women are traditionally weaker than men and that liberals must hate women for even thinking that they belong on the battlefield.

I'd love to introduce him to a couple of kick-boxing females I know. After a few rounds with them, he might drop that "weaker sex" crap.

He apparently has not grasped the fact that traditional females are not likely among those who would seek to be in combat.

May 20, 2013 at 7:33 a.m.
alprova said...

Something just occurred to me.

Jt6gR3hM, in her former forum life, claimed to be a former military member who served in Iraq or Afghanistan.

As such, I would have thought that she would have lots to contribute on this subject.

May 20, 2013 at 7:44 a.m.
conservative said...

What Liberals don't understand or refuse to accept is that the physical standards have been lowered several times in order to get even a few women into traditional male only combat roles.

This is an irrefutable fact.

The standards would not have been lowered if women if enough women were able to pass the physical requirements in the first place.

May 20, 2013 at 8:04 a.m.
patriot1 said...

Alpo (registered republican)....The APFT (Army Physical Fitness Test) states a male, in the 27-31 age range, must complete 77 pushups in 2 minutes to achieve a 100 on that portion of the test. Likewise a female, in the same age group, has to only do 50 for a 100 score. In the same age group, for the 2 mile run a male must complete it in 13:18 while a female can drag in at 15:48 and still score 100.

My question to you, why the difference? Would it possibly have anything to do with gender? Yeah, yeah...I know your wife may be some kind of kick box champion and can kick you "all over Georgia", but try to set that aside.

May 20, 2013 at 8:14 a.m.
daytonsdarwin said...

Don't forget the rapes committed by US servicemen against civilians in foreign countries, both as occupiers in foreign invasions and where military bases are located.

These acts are also swept under the flag.

May 20, 2013 at 8:17 a.m.
patriot1 said...

VA officials stress that any veteran who claims to have suffered military sexual trauma has access to free health care.

"It really is the case that a veteran can simply walk through the door, say they've had this experience, and we will get them hooked up with care. There's no documentation required. - AP

Alpo...since you've long been concerned about getting your health care paid for, have you thought about this approach?

May 20, 2013 at 8:45 a.m.
conservative said...

patriot1,

I have to question those standards. Please give me a source. I question because when I was in the Army, before they lowered the standards for a voluntary army a perfect score was 50 pushups (I can still give you 50) for the basic training PT test.

There were five events. I believe they were pushups, sit-ups, monkey bars, 40 yard low crawl and 1 mile run all timed and in rapid succession, all killers. I aced them all except the mile run. I had been a smoker and was out of breath before I even begin the run. I still easily made the 450 club and earned my 3 day pass.

I doubt if even 1 young woman could pass those standards today as well as many men who are currently in the Army simply because the standards have been lowered for all.

When standards are lowered that is all one needs to know. It is not complicated.

May 20, 2013 at 8:49 a.m.
alprova said...

patriot1 wrote: "My question to you, why the difference? Would it possibly have anything to do with gender?"

I don't know and I don't care. My position is simple. If a goil wants to be a grunt, let her go for it.

"Yeah, yeah...I know your wife may be some kind of kick box champion and can kick you "all over Georgia", but try to set that aside."

Sshhhhh...don't wake her up. She'll kick your butt too.

May 20, 2013 at 9:11 a.m.
alprova said...

patriot1 wrote: "Alpo...since you've long been concerned about getting your health care paid for, have you thought about this approach?"

I've never been concerned with "getting my health care paid for." I was without access to health care insurance until PCIP was instituted in Georgia, a benefit provided by ObamaCare.

I pay my premium every month.

May 20, 2013 at 9:16 a.m.
degage said...

Now that was funny Al. Loved it.

May 20, 2013 at 9:18 a.m.
alprova said...

patriot1, I wondered where it was that you got your quote from regarding Veteran health care for sexual abuse. I pulled up my daily digest of news and what do I read on page one of Fox News?

More than 85,000 veterans treated last year over alleged military sex abuse, report say

"More than 85,000 veterans were treated last year for injuries or illness stemming from sexual abuse in the military, and 4,000 sought disability benefits, underscoring the staggering long-term impact of a crisis that has roiled the Pentagon and been condemned by President Barack Obama as ""shameful and disgraceful."..."

"While women are more likely to be victims, men made up nearly 40 percent of the patients the VA treated last year for conditions connected to what it calls "military sexual trauma."..."

Read the rest at: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/05/20/more-than-85000-veterans-treated-last-year-over-alleged-military-sex-abuse/#ixzz2Tq8V0QG3

May 20, 2013 at 9:39 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Alprova notes: “what conservative stated was that liberals are too ignorant to understand that women are traditionally weaker than men and that liberals must hate women for even thinking that they belong on the battlefield. I'd love to introduce him to a couple of kick-boxing females I know. After a few rounds with them, he might drop that "weaker sex" crap.”

From the posts that I’ve read, I’d say Conservative is someone who prefers to live in his own little bubble so to speak. In this case, he is very much behind the times. Other nations integrated women into the military and combat roles years ago, and from what I've read I believe the overall conclusion has been that women perform just as well as men in combat roles. There have been restrictions in some areas, but in other areas they’ve actually demonstrated superior skills - discipline, motivation, and shooting abilities to name a few.

May 20, 2013 at 9:40 a.m.
conservative said...

For the first time only two women marines sign up for the course to become infranty officers.

One droped out the first day! The other after two weeks ( undisclosed medical reasons).

"The first-ever women to enroll in the Marine Corps’ difficult infantry officer course have both been dropped before successfully completing the 13-week program."

"In a statement to Marine Corps Times on Tuesday, an official confirmed that the second of the female Lieutenants was pulled from the program last week because of unspecified medical problems. The other Lieutenant dropped out on September 28th, after failing to complete the first day of training. She was joined by 26 male participants, out of only 109 enrollees in the grueling course."

http://www.forbes.com/sites/katiedrummond/2012/10/16/marine-corps-women/

May 20, 2013 at 9:44 a.m.
patriot1 said...

Alpo seez.."I wondered where it was that you got your quote from regarding Veteran health care for sexual abuse. I pulled up my daily digest of news and what do I read on page one of Fox News?"

Alpo, I long ago learned you don't like to be confused by facts...but if you look just a little closer at that Fox News story, you'll see it was REALLY an AP story. Glad to see you're tuned in to Fox though.

May 20, 2013 at 9:48 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Jt6gR3hM says: “Although this seems to be a more reasoned position I think I’ll let my post stand as is to reflect your earlier less respectful posts.”

And I’ll let my original post and comment stand as well, Jt6gR3hM.

As I said to you earlier, I believe there is a serious problem within the military leadership in regard to this issue, and I also think that our military leadership is letting everyone down by not pursuing the individuals who are committing these crimes.

Clearly, they need to make an effort to try to live up to those codes, ethics, and mottos that they’re preaching to the troops. Granted, it’s challenging task, but it’s a critical part of their jobs and it simply comes with the territory so to speak.

Jt6gR3hM says: “Well you have made your usual blanket accusation so why not be specific for once in naming those on the thread that that have “scramble(d) to excuse criminal conduct.”

My usual blanket accusation? I don’t think so, Jt6gR3hM. There is a difference between a summary and a blanket statement, but you’re entitled to your opinion.

In this case, there have only been a few posters who’ve said what needs to be said about this issue. Rape is not a norm male behavior, and the U.S. military leadership needs to step-up and start dealing with the people committing these crimes more effectively.

If it’s truly too tough to prosecute the people who are committing these crimes in a military court, then, perhaps, the U.S. military needs to take steps to perform more intensive psychological testing in its advancement and recruitment policies and procedures. It’s not like the people who are condoning and committing these crimes have healthy psychological profiles.

May 20, 2013 at 10:02 a.m.
conservative said...

Thanks patriot1,

So, in the modern "be all you can be" Army a 17-21 year old female only has to do 13 pushups (I did not mistype) 47 situps and run (even walk) 2 miles in 19:42 seconds to pass basic training.

What a joke!

And this is after 8 weeks of training to get them up to that ridiculously low standard!

http://usarmybasic.com/army-physical-fitness/apft-standards

May 20, 2013 at 10:07 a.m.
patriot1 said...

Alpo says.."I don't know and I don't care. My position is simple. If a goil(sic) wants to be a grunt, let her go for it."

With all the commentary and bloviating you do on a subject when confronted with facts your standard answer is "I don't know and I don't care?" How funny.

May 20, 2013 at 10:15 a.m.
conservative said...

mountainlaurel,

You are entrenched in Liberal la la land.

Where are these women in combat you speak of?

Please tell me why the standards to pass Army basic training are so low and different for women than men.

May 20, 2013 at 10:17 a.m.
dude_abides said...

conservative said... "...a perfect score was 50 pushups (I can still give you 50)... "...I still easily made the 450 club and earned my 3 day pass."

"I doubt if even 1 young woman could pass those standards today as well as many men who are currently in the Army simply because the standards have been lowered for all."

yeah, yeah, you older you get, the better you were.

conservative conquering women in his younger days:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RY3oRVzjSIg

May 20, 2013 at 10:23 a.m.
alprova said...

patriot1 wrote: "With all the commentary and bloviating you do on a subject when confronted with facts your standard answer is "I don't know and I don't care?" How funny."

This is one subject that I don't really have an opinion on, one way or the other, except when it comes to those who want to be totally sexist about it.

So when it comes to women in the military, I don't know a thing about the standards, and I don't care if they are set lower.

And Sir, if you don't start being a bit more pleasant, my wife said she will meet you at the place of your choosing and will be happy to demonstrate to you that she ain't afraid of no man.

She'll kick your buuuutttt!!!

May 20, 2013 at 10:47 a.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Conservative says and asks: “You are entrenched in Liberal la la land. Where are these women in combat you speak of?”

I believe the “pioneers” so speak can be found in Denmark, Israel, and Norway:

Denmark: Since 1988, Denmark has had a policy of "total inclusion," which came on the heels of 1985 "combat trials" exploring the capabilities of women to fight on the front lines. "Danish research showed that women performed just as well as men in land combat roles," according to the British MOD study. Although all posts are open to women, physical requirements have so far prevented them from joining the country's Special Operations Forces.

Israel: In 1985 the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) began putting women into combat positions and by 2009 women were serving in artillery units, rescue forces, and in anti-aircraft forces. While women must take part in compulsory military service, they are conscripted for only two years, versus three for men. A study on the integration of female combatants in the IDF between 2002 and 2005 found that women often exhibit "superior skills" in discipline, motivation, and shooting abilities, yet still face prejudicial treatment stemming from "a perceived threat to the historical male combat identity."

Norway: In 1985, Norway became the first country in NATO to allow women to serve in all combat capacities, including submarines. Norwegian women are also subject to the draft in the event of a national mobilization. "The few women that are attracted by the infantry and cavalry do a great job in the Norwegian Army," says Col. Ingrid Gjerde, an infantry officer in the Norwegian military for 25 years. "I have to be clear: You have to meet the physical standards, because the job is still the same. It works very well as long as women hold the standards," added Colonel Gjerde, who was the commander of Norwegian forces in Afghanistan in 2012. "It's not a big deal because women who go into these fields know the standards, and it's not that hard for women to train up to the standards if they really want."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/13/130125-women-combat-world-australia-israel-canada-norway/

May 20, 2013 at 10:47 a.m.
conservative said...

Women are not fighting in infantry units mountainlaurel.

Israel learned the lesson the hard way in the forties. Israel is a small country with a small population. Israel needs every able bodied person so Israel uses women to train men but they are not fighting in front line infantry units.

Tell me about the wars Denmark and Norway are now engaged in and their success over their enemies using women in combat.

You are quite gullible.

May 20, 2013 at 11:12 a.m.
klifnotes said...

Back on topic: The bottom line is, the very nature of military and war promotes, even condones rape. After all, as militaries prepare for war, rape has always been considered one of the spoils of war. It's basic purpose being the total breakdown via humiliation of the human spirit. Rape only becomes an issue when the chickens come home to roost. And there's no on/off switch available that can suddenly turn off what's been turned on.

The solution, but no guarantee, would be to remove the idea that rape is OK, as long as the nation is at war and it's the enemy, their wives, their daughters and sons getting raped.

May 20, 2013 at 11:15 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Give all the guys salt-peter and move on.

May 20, 2013 at 11:28 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

"Lawrence O’Donnell has admitted that his on air persona is an act that is employed to draw gullible left wing viewers." - jt...etc.

I'm curious to know where you get that bit of information. Methinks you're pulling it out of whatever source you get your other warped ideas from. Please back up your statement with a direct quote from him relating to what you just said. He has always openly stood for the very philosophy he espouses on air. He has admitted to being a socialist but many people do not have a clear understanding of what he means when he says that. In fact, most of you on the right don't even have a rudimentary understanding of the term. You just think it's somehow un-American and a dirty word.

The kind of socialist he refers to is not really the crazed extremist you righties like to think it is. We are all a mixed bag of socialists/capitalists, whether you will admit it or not. Here is his explanation of who he is. I think it fits a lot of people. I have no problem identifying myself with what he says here:

"I have been calling myself a socialist ever since I first read the definition of socialism in the first economics class I took in college. Not that (I) choose the socialist option every time but (I) do consider socialism a reasonable option under certain circumstances; in fact, under many circumstances. As any introductory economics course can tell you, there is no capitalist economy anywhere in the world, and there is no socialist economy anywhere in the world, not even Cuba. We are all mixed economies; that is, mixes of capitalism and socialism, and we all vary that mix in different ways. China has more capitalism, and a lot more capitalism, than has Cuba, but it also has a lot more socialism than we [the United States] do. Our socialist programs include the biggest government spending programs: Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, as well as welfare, and the socialist program I hate the most, agriculture subsidies. Yes, I'm a socialist, but I hate bad socialism, and there is plenty of bad socialism out there, just like there is plenty of bad capitalism out there, like the capitalism that pollutes our rivers or makes health care too expensive for so many people. I can argue this because every side of this is true: capitalism is good, capitalism is bad; socialism is good, socialism is bad; all of those things are true at the same time. That's why we have a mixed economy, an economy in which we are trying to use the best, most efficient forms of capitalism, and the best, most efficient forms of socialism, where necessary. So my full truth is I am as much a capitalist as I am a socialist; but since we live in the only mature country in the world where 'socialist' is considered such a dirty word that no one would dare admit to being one, I feel more compelled to stand up for the socialist side of me than the capitalist side of me." - Lawrence O'Donnell

May 20, 2013 at 11:33 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Pretty sure L.O. not worth all those words. ^^

May 20, 2013 at 11:48 a.m.
Rickaroo said...

PT, I strongly encourage you NOT to read any of it. I fear that, like a vampire exposed to sunlight, you will shrivel and die instantaneously from exposure to the light of truth and logic. Anyway, I know it's much easier for you to get your "knowledge" from those short right-wing sound-bytes that don't require any thinking.

May 20, 2013 at 11:52 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

Ricky, are you related to......never mind.

May 20, 2013 at 11:55 a.m.
Leaf said...

I may not have been in combat, but I watch movies. And everyone knows you have to be able to hold your shield to protect your left side, and the right side of the man to your right. From the knee to the neck. It doesn't matter how well you thrust your spear if you can't hold your shield high enough.

May 20, 2013 at 12:02 p.m.
alprova said...

conservaitve wrote: "Women are not fighting in infantry units mountainlaurel. Israel learned the lesson the hard way in the forties. Israel is a small country with a small population. Israel needs every able bodied person so Israel uses women to train men but they are not fighting in front line infantry units."

You're not quite up to speed on how women serve in Israel..

http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2013/05/16/180045066/Women-In-Combat-Lessons-From-The-Israel-Defense-Forces

May 20, 2013 at 12:13 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

I will stipulate that women can, and do, fight admirably in combat. Next?

May 20, 2013 at 12:17 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

Something just occurred to me.

Jt6gR3hM, in her former forum life, claimed to be a former military member who served in Iraq or Afghanistan.

As such, I would have thought that she would have lots to contribute on this subject.


Nice try Sherlock but I don’t believe in fairy tales like reincarnation.

I have to address so many issues but its still early so who knows maybe I will weigh in on that subject..

Maybe if we can locate this female combat veteran you are so obsessed with we can get a "cat fight" going between her and your wife and we’ll see some good old kicking “buuuutttt!!!”

I bet you just love a good "cat fight" ... don't you?

By the way I bet you don’t let that “buuuutttt!!!” kicking wife of yours know that you refer to her that way.

May 20, 2013 at 12:36 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

daytonsdarwin said...

Don't forget the rapes committed by US servicemen against civilians in foreign countries, both as occupiers in foreign invasions and where military bases are located.

These acts are also swept under the flag.


If they were all swept under the flag how is it you know “so much” about it unless, maybe you were there and applied yourself?

Hedley Lamarr: Qualifications?

Applicant: Rape, murder, arson, and rape.

Hedley Lamarr: You said rape twice.

Applicant: I like rape.

May 20, 2013 at 12:50 p.m.
jesse said...

Here's a good example of no matter what your opinion you can find something to back it some where!

http://www.wnd.com/2001/08/10269/

May 20, 2013 at 12:51 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo said...

"Lawrence O’Donnell has admitted that his on air persona is an act that is employed to draw gullible left wing viewers." - jt...etc.

I'm curious to know where you get that bit of information. Methinks you're pulling it out of whatever source you get your other warped ideas from. Please back up your statement with a direct quote from him relating to what you just said.

(Boy do you ever have a love affair going with Larry. I didn’t realize it would hurt you that much so I’m truly sorry. However the article you quoted contained this clue in his “land no where” ramble about capitalism and socialism.)

“So my full truth is I am as much a capitalist as I am a socialist; but since we live in the only mature country in the world where 'socialist' is considered such a dirty word that no one would dare admit to being one, I feel more compelled to stand up for the socialist side of me than the capitalist side of me." - Lawrence O'Donnell”


As to where I got the bit of information you were very interested in obtaining, here it is:

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-05-26/lifestyle/35232480_1_msnbc-star-keith-olbermann-msnbc-show-prime-time-program/3

What matters in cable, Povich says, “is what gets the anchor ticking, what makes them emotional and wanting to fight. Any good cable show on TV has that common thread.”

O’Donnell has enough detachment and self-awareness to acknowledge that some of what gets on cable is amped up for effect, that part of it is an act and that, to a certain extent, he’s playing a character. Real life, and actual governing, he says, bears little resemblance to what you see on a talk show. “Working with Republicans was never like that,” he says of his time in government. People on opposite sides of the aisle, he says, tended to address each other reasonably, respectfully and usually honestly, even when they sharply disagreed.

“My weakness is I don’t take a lot of this [incendiary rhetoric] seriously,” he says after his show. “It’s hard to get me outraged. I hate the yelling stuff. I hate the way interruptions look.”

Really? So why does he do it himself at times? Where’s the integrity in that?

O’Donnell smiles to himself at the mention of integrity and tells a story about F. Scott Fitzgerald’s days as a Hollywood screenwriter. Struggling to complete his first script, Fitzgerald watched as a far-less-talented colleague produced one commercial success after another.

“I don’t understand it,” one of America’s greatest writers said to a studio boss. “I do everything you ask me to do and fail. He’s a success and he writes [bleep].”

“Ah,” responded the boss, “but even [bleep] has its own integrity.”

May 20, 2013 at 1:15 p.m.
conservative said...

alprova,

You might want to read that article again, "you're not quite up to speed on how women serve in Israel.."

Nothing there to contradict what I have written. What is going on there would not be much different than a female U.S. National Guardsman patrolling our own borders.

Vigilance is one thing, combat is another.

Again, the U.S. has a larger pool of capable men to fight our wars than necessary. We don't need every body to hold a weapon or stop a bullet. We can select and train the best and the fittest.

May 20, 2013 at 1:15 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Leaf said...

I may not have been in combat, but I watch movies. And everyone knows you have to be able to hold your shield to protect your left side, and the right side of the man to your right. From the knee to the neck. It doesn't matter how well you thrust your spear if you can't hold your shield high enough.


You like those gladiator type movies, do you?

May 20, 2013 at 1:38 p.m.
Leaf said...

I've never been in the military but I think Rickaroo had a good observation that in the armed forces you are military first and people second. That's the whole point of training and following orders after all - so you can leave moral judgements to your superiors and kill who they tell you to.

Therefore: The morality of the leaders is the morality of the troops.

Most members of the military are young, and therefore their personalities are not fully formed. Also most members of the military serve for only a few years so they don't personally contribute substantially to the character of the organization or personally remember the traditions of the organization.

Therefore: If the leadership wants to change the culture they can, within a few years.

Evidence: The US Military successfully achieved racial integration long before society at large, because those in leadership roles decided it would happen.

Evidence: Other countries have done it.

Evidence: Corporate America has done it. Mostly.

In conclusion: I believe that it is quite possible to change the culture of the military so that women are treated equally and are not subject to sexual predation. All it takes is leadership and the will to do so.

May 20, 2013 at 1:38 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

mountainlaurel said...

Jt6gR3hM says: “Well you have made your usual blanket accusation so why not be specific for once in naming those on the thread that that have “scramble(d) to excuse criminal conduct.”

My usual blanket accusation? I don’t think so, Jt6gR3hM. There is a difference between a summary and a blanket statement, but you’re entitled to your opinion.

(Summary or blanket. Why split hairs and not go ahead and name the posters that “scramble(d) to excuse criminal conduct.”)

In this case, there have only been a few posters who’ve said what needs to be said about this issue.

(By whose estimation ... Yours?)

Rape is not a norm male behavior, and the U.S. military leadership needs to step-up and start dealing with the people committing these crimes more effectively.

(To hear some people tell it “rape is a normal male behavior”)

If it’s truly too tough to prosecute the people who are committing these crimes in a military court, then, perhaps, the U.S. military needs to take steps to perform more intensive psychological testing in its advancement and recruitment policies and procedures.

(If you are as aware of these cases as you seem to imply you would know that this not a problem restricted just to the military justice system.)

It’s not like the people who are condoning and committing these crimes have healthy psychological profiles.

(Again with the condoning [excusing?]... Who and when?)

May 20, 2013 at 2 p.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "Nice try Sherlock but I don’t believe in fairy tales like reincarnation."

I doubted it then, so it comes as no surprise that you deny it now, since you decided to reinvent yourself.

May 20, 2013 at 2:07 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

You're not quite up to speed on how women serve in Israel..

http://www.npr.org/blogs/parallels/2013/05/16/180045066/Women-In-Combat-Lessons-From-The-Israel-Defense-Forces


Sometimes when I’m driving on the Interstate or Intrastate highways I will observe a flashing blue light out ahead. As I near the light I typically notice that it is a THP vehicle parked about 2’ from some construction workers repairing the guard rail. He/she is there to give approaching drivers a warning in “advance” of this possible safety hazard.

The trooper is usually playing with a cell phone or reading the paper to fend off the extreme boredom of watching the construction workers move about in such a “frantic pace” to quickly complete their tasks. I assume there are few chances for the trooper to actually shoot a scofflaw driver for disregarding his/her warnings.

If you know what I mean?

May 20, 2013 at 2:16 p.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "If you know what I mean?"

I haven't got the first clue what it is that you meant by offering that diatribe. I doubt anyone else does either.

I'm pretty sure that there are no THP patrol cars in Israel with pretty young things drivin' them.

May 20, 2013 at 2:22 p.m.
conservative said...

mountainlaurel,

This bit of news may put you in a rubber room, considering your views against guns especially semi automatic weapons and fully atuomatic weapons.

Hold on tight, Israeli men and women carry these type of weapons around in public! Think about that. Beter yet, look at the pictures for yourself. Even Israeli women wearing bikinis!

Be carefull what you wish for.

"Hot Israeli chick with gun occupies internet"

"Bikini pictures aren’t uncommon and neither are pictures of guns; but put them together and you’ve got everyone’s attention."

http://www.blameitonthevoices.com/2008/01/israeli-women-and-their-guns.html

and

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/routine-emergencies/hot-israeli-chick-with-gun-occupies-internet-1.433693

and

"Israel's Haaretz newspaper, which picked up on the viral photo, wrote that "To an Israeli, the photo makes perfectly practical sense. When soldiers take their weapon off military premises, they must guard it closely and keep it on their person, at all times. Having one's weapon stolen is harshly punished with time in military prison a given. "

"Haaretz also concludes that Israelis are "used to seeing guns in all kinds of places - propped up next to the guy sitting next to us in a coffeeshop, or in a university classroom, and of course, slung over the shoulders of women soldiers." That apparently also includes the shoulder of a woman ready for an afternoon at the beach."

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/bikini-clad-gun-toting-israeli-woman-internet-sensation-article-1.1113980#ixzz2TrFLDx4x

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10150981679934534&set=a.66031429533.93081.591279533&type=3&theater

May 20, 2013 at 2:26 p.m.
nowfedup said...

For those that never "attended" the military news flash, Senior folks are nearly always protected by good ole career boys network. The UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice, is better known to lower ranks and non-career types as "Miiitary Code of INjustice for good reason, Military is run mostly by careerists and ring knockers who put their career and other senior members way ahead of their people. Not just in the rape thing, but incident after incident, remember how the story of "Rescued Army Spec, or how "former pro football player hero etc. Perhaps 10-20% actually do the jobs, carry the guns, fly the planes, etc, rest are simply overhead who knows how to get promoted, When draft ended so did the whistle blowers as career types know better.

May 20, 2013 at 2:28 p.m.
Rickaroo said...

Jtwhatever... I hate to be so banal as to state the obvious but you're a buffoon. I do not have a love affair going on with O'Donnell nor does it "hurt (me) that much" that you attack him. What bothers me is someone telling such blatant lies and spreading misinformation, period. I think that O'Donnell happens to have some keen insights and observations but just because he's a self-proclaimed socialist you teabagger-types with your heads up your butts automatically dismiss him as being just another mouthpiece for the "liberal" media. That article you cite (I read it in its entirety) is meaningless. It does nothing to detract from the person he claims to be. I'm not going to deny that any radio or TV commentator who voices their opinion sometimes plays to the emotions of their audience, but that does not mean that they are being phony about the substance of what they're saying. I can't pretend to second-guess who or what anyone really is when they get behind closed doors but everything O'Donnell has said and stood for in both his personal and public life is in harmony with who he claims to be on air. You have taken one quote and tried to stretch it into something it's not. But then, that's par for the course for you wack-doodle wingnuts.

May 20, 2013 at 2:37 p.m.
patriot1 said...

nowfedup....you are correct, however it's more convoluted that that. I have completed OERs and EERs and been on the receiving end of OERs. Anything short of a stellar evaluation and flowering commentary on an evaluation can be career ending.
In addition, at least at battalion level, an Equal Employment Opportunity officer is sitting at his/her desk, thumping their fingers looking for something, anything to investigate. Consider Major Hasad, Fort Hood shooter. Had any of his peers or superiors hinted that his actions might be suspect before the shooting they would no doubt have felt the wrath of that EEO officer. A letter in a personnel file that a person has been looked at or investigated by EEO, and their career is over. It's much more career enhancing and safer to ignore and pretend to notice nothing than risk that visit by the EEO.

May 20, 2013 at 2:57 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

His Alponess said to Jt: "I doubted it then, so it comes as no surprise that you deny it now, since you decided to reinvent yourself." that seems to be daggone close to snarky...guess it depends if you're the snarker or the snarkee, eh Alpy?

May 20, 2013 at 3:01 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Carney says that's a "hypothetical" so he is refusing to comment. "I'm not going to extrapolate what might have happened hypothetically." this guy a hoot a minute

May 20, 2013 at 3:04 p.m.
dude_abides said...

alprova, I think I understand what JtY2K is saying. She's saying that as she nears the blue lights there is a doppler shift that makes her want to shoot either herself or the cop guarding the construction crew, or another driver, if one of these folks happens to be a woman. As she nears the site, the sound of the blue lights makes her nervous, and something's gotta damn well happen.

May 20, 2013 at 3:07 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

When the Justice Department began investigating possible leaks of classified information about North Korea in 2009, investigators did more than obtain telephone records of a working journalist (James Rosen, Fox) suspected of receiving the secret material. They used security badge access records to track the reporter’s comings and goings from the State Department, according to a newly obtained court affidavit. They traced the timing of his calls with a State Department security adviser suspected of sharing the classified report. They obtained a search warrant for the reporter’s personal e-mails. The DOJ has done the impossible...now has the MSM defending Fox

May 20, 2013 at 3:09 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Sounds like PlainTruth suffers from snarkolepsy, to me.

Him hoot a minute, too.

May 20, 2013 at 3:12 p.m.
Maximus said...

The Obama dirty tricks campaign continues, White House hacks into Fox News Reporter, Rosen, emails in order to trash the reporter and Fox News.

As usual with two bit, incompetent, Marxist thugs like Obama, the end justifies the means. Boy does this pimp need to be impeached, but it will never happen because Obama is black. As with most affirmative action appointees, we must lower our expectations of performance and integrity, especially when it comes to Obama. Mediocrity for all.....except for the ruling class and a few A-list guests. Yes, that is the Obama formula for success.

May 20, 2013 at 3:14 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

dude: good one. hahahahaha

May 20, 2013 at 3:17 p.m.
Leaf said...

Snarkolepsy. Like.

May 20, 2013 at 3:23 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Maximus said "...it will never happen because Obama is black."

Just can't hide it, can you, James Earl?

May 20, 2013 at 3:24 p.m.
Maximus said...

Dude the truth is the truth. Our PC press will not tolerate an Obama impeachment. The Benghazi incident alone is a clear example of dereliction of duty. Where was our President when our ambassador was being dragged through the streets rapped and murdered?

May 20, 2013 at 3:42 p.m.
tifosi said...

Damn this economy! It is ruining President Obama's socialism agenda.

"Is Motor City getting its mojo back?

After years of losing loyal customers frustrated by quality and reliability problems, domestic automakers are showing a new-found focus on customer service that is winning back skeptics – boosting sales, market share and profits."

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/detroit-roars-back-after-years-quality-issues-1C9991202

May 20, 2013 at 3:52 p.m.
alprova said...

PT wrote: "His Alponess said to Jt: "I doubted it then, so it comes as no surprise that you deny it now, since you decided to reinvent yourself." that seems to be daggone close to snarky...guess it depends if you're the snarker or the snarkee, eh Alpy?"

You may or may not be aware of it, but the woman claimed to be a war veteran when she first appeared on the scene. Since her prior posts as tu_quoque were completely wiped out, she has thew luxury of denying anything and everything she posted prior to her return.

Now I know you're still raw about the other day, but since the comment I made was to her and her alone, don't get yourself worked up to the point that you goof and place yourself in the middle of something that is none of your business.

Was what I wrote Snarky? I don't happen to think so. I nicely pointed out that she can deny anything she wrote back then. I'm sure that there are others who were paying attention when she made the claim to have been a war veteran from the Middle East.

May 20, 2013 at 3:54 p.m.
Leaf said...

Some people take these comments too personally. And by some people, I mean you. Idiot.

;>

May 20, 2013 at 4:06 p.m.
Leaf said...

Maximus said... Dude the truth is the truth.


Since when did you become a fan of the truth, Maxi?

May 20, 2013 at 4:12 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

You talking to Alpo, Leafy?

May 20, 2013 at 4:12 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo said...

Jtwhatever... I hate to be so banal (Why this time? - Jt) as to state the obvious but you're a buffoon. I do not have a love affair going on with O'Donnell nor does it "hurt (me) that much" that you attack him. What bothers me is someone telling such blatant lies and spreading misinformation, period. That article you cite (I read it in its entirety) is meaningless. It does nothing to detract from the person he claims to be.


(Don’t you remember this:)

"Lawrence O’Donnell has admitted that his on air persona is an act that is employed to draw gullible left wing viewers." - jt...etc.

I'm curious to know where you get that bit of information. Methinks you're pulling it out of whatever source you get your other warped ideas from. Please back up your statement with a direct quote from him relating to what you just said.

(So your saying I was right and back up my statement .... Right?)


I'm not going to deny that any radio or TV commentator who voices their opinion sometimes plays to the emotions of their audience, but that does not mean that they are being phony about the substance of what they're saying. I can't pretend to second-guess who or what anyone really is when they get behind closed doors

(Weasel words?)


Everything O'Donnell has said and stood for in both his personal and public life is in harmony with who he claims to be on air.

(You mean like when he said he is much a capitalist as a socialist but he plays a straight socialist on air to "lure the loons".)

You have taken one quote and tried to stretch it into something it's not.

(No, I think I’ve taken that one quote and reduced someone's day dreams to ashes)

But then, that's par for the course for you wack-doodle wingnuts.

(I think this wingnut has whacked a doodle)

May 20, 2013 at 4:13 p.m.
dude_abides said...

sir maxilot... There are embassies and consulates all over the world right now that would, ideally, have more protection than they do. There were protests ongoing about the video in question. This is republican "gotcha" semantic bullsh!t, and it's backfiring.

I love how you try to get serious, once in a while, after talking the objectivist crap ad nauseam.

May 20, 2013 at 4:16 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Bqckfiring, dude? You wish.

May 20, 2013 at 4:19 p.m.
tifosi said...

I keep waiting for this new socialism that Maximus told us about. But, it just ain't happenin'!!!

"Stocks held modest gains Monday, boosted by energy, with major averages extending their gains from last week and hovering around fresh all-time highs."

May 20, 2013 at 4:23 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Benghazi was all about covering Hillary's ax-hande wide butt. Not so much about Barry.

May 20, 2013 at 4:34 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

JT wrote: "You seemed to like and trust the poll numbers when dude_abides posted them."

Actually, I didn't even opine on the poll, but don't let that stop you from your current quest to controvert anything and everything I write.

(Then why did you post dudeabides’ response to the poll numbers and then expound on their significance if you had no opinion of the poll?)


"Are you so ignorant of the science of polling that you feel they don’t take that into account and compensate for such imbalances"

Sweetheart, I have written many times that one of my pert-time ventures is with a local firm that conducts political polls.

There is no scientific method on the books for assuring that the respondents to any poll, regardless of how they are conducted, assure any balanced responses. It's hit and miss at best.


I don’t know about your pert-time(?) ventures but there is this from Wiki:

Polls based on samples of populations are subject to sampling error which reflects the effects of chance and uncertainty in the sampling process. The uncertainty is often expressed as a margin of error. The margin of error is usually defined as the radius of a confidence interval for a particular statistic from a survey.

A 3% margin of error means that if the same procedure is used a large number of times, 95% of the time the true population average will be within the 95% confidence interval of the sample estimate plus or minus 3%.

Since some people do not answer calls from strangers, or refuse to answer the poll, poll samples may not be representative samples from a population due to a non-response bias. Because of this selection bias, the characteristics of those who agree to be interviewed may be markedly different from those who decline.

That is, the actual sample is a biased version of the universe the pollster wants to analyze. In these cases, bias introduces new errors, one way or the other, that are in addition to errors caused by sample size.

Error due to bias does not become smaller with larger sample sizes, because taking a larger sample size simply repeats the same mistake on a larger scale. If the people who refuse to answer, or are never reached, have the same characteristics as the people who do answer, then the final results should be unbiased. If the people who do not answer have different opinions then there is bias in the results.

In terms of election polls, studies suggest that bias effects are small, but each polling firm has its own techniques for adjusting weights to minimize selection bias.

Then there is this:

http://www.i-marvin.si/ statistical analyses of surveys

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1570866706000499 HyperQuick algorithm for discrete hypergeometric distribution

(cont)

May 20, 2013 at 4:47 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

(Cont)

"The RCP average is not a Fox News poll"

Precisely. RCP, for as much as they average the results of many polls, is not the authoritative entity for determining with accuracy the public approval of the President.


Nobody said it was authoritative but as an average it will normally be superior to a single poll.

Also from Wiki:

“Another way to reduce the margin of error is to rely on poll averages. This makes the assumption that the procedure is similar enough between many different polls and uses the sample size of each poll to create a polling average.”

May 20, 2013 at 4:48 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

ALPO is a pert-time pollster!! Is there nothing this guy can't do?

May 20, 2013 at 5:03 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

The woman claimed to be a war veteran when she first appeared on the scene. Since her prior posts as tu_quoque were completely wiped out, she has thew (sic) luxury of denying anything and everything she posted prior to her return.

(If you had the posts of this woman that you and Easy123 are so obsessed with it would still assist you in no way of being able to identify any details about me. It delights me to no end that you two exhibit so much angst about your impotence in resolving this. By the way as long as you two continue to make certain mistakes about me I can continue to feel completely sure you know nothing)

Now I know you're still raw about the other day, but since the comment I made was to her and her alone, don't get yourself worked up to the point that you goof and place yourself in the middle of something that is none of your business.

(In other words you better butt out JT or he will be back on you and this time he will go all the way with his boasts.)

Was what I wrote Snarky? I don't happen to think so. I nicely pointed out that she can deny anything she wrote back then. I'm sure that there are others who were paying attention when she made the claim to have been a war veteran from the Middle East.

(I have not read that anyone else has backed you up on those claims)

May 20, 2013 at 5:08 p.m.
patriot1 said...

If there is anything this registered republican, pert-time pollster can't do, he has a family member that can.

May 20, 2013 at 5:11 p.m.
alprova said...

PT wrote: "ALPO is a pert-time pollster!! Is there nothing this guy can't do?"

Actually, I certify poll results, part-time, a function of my accounting business.

May 20, 2013 at 5:14 p.m.
alprova said...

patriot1 wrote: "If there is anything this registered republican, pert-time pollster can't do, he has a family member that can."

Jealous much?

May 20, 2013 at 5:16 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

tifosi said...

I keep waiting for this new socialism that Maximus told us about. But, it just ain't happenin'!!!

"Stocks held modest gains Monday, boosted by energy, with major averages extending their gains from last week and hovering around fresh all-time highs."


I know what you mean.

Capitalism, even the Crony Capitalism favored by this administration, always kicks Socialist Butt.

Yeah team!

May 20, 2013 at 5:16 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Conservative says. “This bit of news may put you in a rubber room, considering your views against guns. . . Hold on tight, Israeli men and women carry these type of weapons around in public! Think about that. Beter yet, look at the pictures. . . Even Israeli women wearing bikinis!”

You poor guy. (sigh) . . .Exactly how does this relate to the fact that our military leadership is not effectively dealing with rapists within the military? . . . And exactly what kind of Christian goes to web sites to look at photos of Israeli women wearing bikinis? Have you given any thought as to what God is going say? Will gawkers be able to enter heaven?

May 20, 2013 at 5:18 p.m.
dude_abides said...

JtY2K... I recall yu_ making some claims about serving over there, because I was quite surprised, given the nature of yu_r previous posts. It had something to do with discharge papers, as I recall.

May 20, 2013 at 5:19 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

nowfedup said...

For those that never "attended" the military news flash, Senior folks are nearly always protected by good ole career boys network. The UCMJ, Uniform Code of Military Justice, is better known to lower ranks and non-career types as "Miiitary Code of INjustice for good reason, Military is run mostly by careerists and ring knockers who put their career and other senior members way ahead of their people. Not just in the rape thing, but incident after incident, remember how the story of "Rescued Army Spec, or how "former pro football player hero etc. Perhaps 10-20% actually do the jobs, carry the guns, fly the planes, etc, rest are simply overhead who knows how to get promoted, When draft ended so did the whistle blowers as career types know better.

(Corporal Klinger ?)

May 20, 2013 at 5:26 p.m.
conservative said...

mountainlaurel,

This is the third time I have had to point out to you that I have made no comment about rape in the military.

Why do you Liberals often resort to insults when you can't defend your positions?

Please, don't be small.

May 20, 2013 at 5:26 p.m.
limric said...

YO DUDE,

And so it is written:

Man who suffer from Snarkolepsy, get buried in --- wait for it --- Snarcophagus !!

Ba dum bump, tieesh!

May 20, 2013 at 5:37 p.m.
patriot1 said...

Alphttp://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=...

alpoo....keep up those stem winders, someone will believe you

May 20, 2013 at 5:38 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

lkeithlu said...

Whistleblowers and those who fight back can be punished, and someone who has aspirations may consider abuse to be something one must tolerate if one wants to succeed.


Gregory Hicks, the Democrat Benghazi whistleblower?

May 20, 2013 at 5:54 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

alpo says "Actually, I certify poll results, part-time, a function of my accounting business." God help us.

May 20, 2013 at 5:55 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

BRP, At the risk of sounding sensible (really?), why not limit any decision to place men or women in combat situations, only if their actions are in the defense of the United States?


We shall fight on the North Carolina beaches, we shall fight on the Kennedy International landing grounds, we shall fight in the cornfields of Nebraska and in the streets of South L.A., we shall fight in the hills of Appalachia ; we shall never surrender to the foreign Euro-Trash scum.

May 20, 2013 at 6:04 p.m.
dude_abides said...

limric... outstanding! Right down to the cymbalism (tieesh!) LMAO

You'd think modern medicine could intervein with a course of snarcotics to cure this malady.

May 20, 2013 at 6:11 p.m.
hambone said...

"Jt6gR3hM" What does that stand for? It must be a doosey. How long did it take for you to think that up?

May 20, 2013 at 6:17 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

CIA source says Fox News scandal the "4th Shoe"; says it goes much deeper; says WH also sitting on "something" that has top aides terrified. It best be on video tape or the duped will never buy it

May 20, 2013 at 6:22 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Plain_Jack_Dennis,

You'll buy it regardless, right, Jackie? Thanks for keep us up to date on the WingNut propaganda!

May 20, 2013 at 6:33 p.m.
alprova said...

PT wrote: "alpo says "Actually, I certify poll results, part-time, a function of my accounting business." God help us."

Had you been paying attention, you would know that I've been doing such work, part-time, for two and a half years now. I also audit retirement plans, process 401K loans, and process paperwork necessary for businesses to be compliant with all the rules and regs when offering 401K plans to employees.

I used to do this nationwide for several large employers, but my health no longer is such that I can travel away from home, so I am serving a few select clients in the immediate area, all of whom are involved in the medical arena.

May 20, 2013 at 6:34 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

May come as a shock, Prova, but we all don't hang on your every word. (Except Easy)

May 20, 2013 at 6:48 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said...

You're determined to keep involving yourself in something that doesn't concern you for one minute, aren't you?

(Boy, that sure appears to be bad news for me)

It's not going to happen. Mind your own business.

(Now I’m definitely sure that no good can come to me over this)

Ma'am, you're forgetting what and who started what happened yesterday.

(Is that important, in these types of interactions, when assigning guilt for inappropriate activities?)

You were banned for similar behavior.

(I was? Can you direct me to some source that will verify that fact as I think I’m still here but this could be the Twilight Zone.)

I would think that you would prefer to sit on the sidelines and stick to the issues.

(Or you will hunt me down and reveal that I don’t recycle, or some other such disqualifying bit of personal failure?)

May 20, 2013 at 7:11 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

alprova said ...

I am serving a few select clients in the immediate area, all of whom are involved in the medical arena.


That is very interesting.

May 20, 2013 at 7:14 p.m.
alprova said...

Breaking News

A battered President Barack Obama, whose reputation has been under fire for most of the last month, is suspected by House Republicans of orchestrating the deadly tornadoes in Oklahoma over the past two days, to hopefully take the limelight off of his administration and focus it elsewhere.

House Republican Darrel Issa has called for a full investigation and numerous hearings to determine whether cloud seeding and black helicopters were ordered by the President to manipulate weather patterns in the area around Oklahoma City, spawning deadly twisters that have ravaged the area over the past 24 hours.

"The President may have put the lives of 200,000 American citizens in potential danger." Issa stated. "We're looking into rumors that the National Weather service, at the President's behest, may have delayed storm warnings that has resulted in lives being lost."

"This is an abomination," Senator Lindsey Graham was quoted by a Fox News affiliate as saying off-camera. "This President has blood on his hands."

Senator Mitch McConnell held a press conference outside of his Washington Office, offering, "The fact that people have died proves there is a conspiracy and a culture of intimidation throughout the Obama administration. We intend to investigate this recent outbreak of tornadoes to determine if the President had any involvement in them."

House Republican Jason Chaffetz (Utah) was visibly upset at his news conference.

"That man has got to go. I'm introducing a bill demanding a call for impeachment proceedings. He went too far this time."

Speaker of the House, John Boehner's only comment was to wonder where Hillary Clinton was and what involvement she had in the massive storms. "I want her in front of a Congressional panel no later than tomorrow. We've had enough with their shenanigans."

President Obama, speaking in the Rose Garden, asked for Americans to pray for those who were directly affected by the severe weather in Oklahoma and refused to answer questions following his statement.

"Folks, let's concentrate on the rescue efforts underway in Oklahoma. I'm going to monitor what is going on in my residence."

In a moment of confusion as the President was walking toward the White House, "YOU LIE!!" was suddenly shouted from the press pool of reporters. White House Secret Service agents sprung into action and tackled U.S. Representative and assistant House Whip Joe Wilson (SC), who had apparently slipped in unnoticed on the White House grounds. He was taken into custody and is expected to face charges on Tuesday morning in Federal Court on trespassing charges.

Laura K. Furgione, Deputy Director for the National Weather Service made a public statement that those affected by the tornadoes has at least an eight minute warning and that there was nothing unusual about the severe weather outbreak over the past two days.

"We will be cooperating with any and all inquiries related to these storms." she said.

May 20, 2013 at 7:45 p.m.
hambone said...

"Jt6gR3hM" ???

May 20, 2013 at 7:47 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpo wants very badly to matter.

May 20, 2013 at 7:49 p.m.
alprova said...

PT wrote: "May come as a shock, Prova, but we all don't hang on your every word."

Who's this "we" that you claim to type for?

Contrary to what you believe I am all about, I don't type to please anyone or everyone, especially you.

If you're determined to keep buzzing like a little bee, I'll be happy to drop some more honey for you to dine on.

May 20, 2013 at 7:56 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Rickaroo

Even when soldiers are right about their accusations, they are almost always looked upon with contempt by their military peers, whether it's a matter of some soldier reporting another for murdering innocent civilians, mistreating prisoners, or accusing a fellow soldier of rape.

The private who first reported abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib was met with nothing but scorn from his fellow soldiers.

(If you are limiting his fellow soldiers to those he turned in you are probably right although the record shows that he was generally well received by nearly all the soldiers he came in contact with after his report, during the investigations and trials.)

Even his family and hometown hated him.

(That understandable since the group of MP’s he was assigned to came from the area around his hometown. Many of the people from there including some family members had family and friends that were convicted for the abuse and they were wrong but naturally upset with him. But how is that a negative against the military?)

Such that he was forced to live in another city after getting out of the military.

(He moved to another location for his safety at the suggestion of the Army and for a period they provided armed guards to protect him and his family.)

They didn't regard him as a hero for having the courage to stand his ground as an individual but as a traitor who stepped out of line and refused to follow orders.

(No they were wrong but mad at him for violating what they considered the trust of friends and neighbors)

In other words, he was being a person first and a military member second, and he paid a heavy price for it, as does any whistle blower or any soldier who tries to assert his/her individuality.

(But this came primarily from civilians and not the military)

May 20, 2013 at 7:59 p.m.
alprova said...

JT wrote: "That is very interesting."

Actually, it's rather tedious and boring, but it is lucrative.

May 20, 2013 at 7:59 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—

President Obama used his weekly radio address on Saturday to reassure the American people that he has “played no role whatsoever” in the U.S. government over the past four years.

“Right now, many of you are angry at the government, and no one is angrier than I am,” he said. “Quite frankly, I am glad that I have had no involvement in such an organization.”

The President’s outrage only increased, he said, when he “recently became aware of a part of that government called the Department of Justice.”

“The more I learn about the activities of these individuals, the more certain I am that I would not want to be associated with them,” he said. “They sound like bad news.”

Mr. Obama closed his address by indicating that beginning next week he would enforce what he called a “zero tolerance policy on governing.”

“If I find that any members of my Administration have had any intimate knowledge of, or involvement in, the workings of the United States government, they will be dealt with accordingly,” he said.

May 20, 2013 at 8:07 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Plain_Jack_Dennis,

"Alpo wants very badly to matter."

Considering you've gone through the trouble to create three, separate profiles to post in these threads, you might take a second to look in the mirror.

No one wants to matter as much as the poster formerly known as Jack_Dennis and Rebus and now posts under the alias PlainTruth.

May 20, 2013 at 8:08 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Alpo. Your writing time would be better spent drafting an apology letter to me.

May 20, 2013 at 8:08 p.m.
Easy123 said...

Plain_Jack_Dennis,

"Alpo. Your writing time would be better spent drafting an apology letter to me."

You've yet to realize that going on and on about this doesn't help your case in the least. The fact that it continues to bother you several days later would lead one to believe that there was a significant amount of truth to the claims made about you.

May 20, 2013 at 8:12 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/compost/wp/2013/05/17/the-irss-unreasonable-501c4-requests/

Dear organization applying for 501 (c) 4 status:

In order to keep your 501(c)4 status, we have a few straight-forward requests.

For groups with “Tea Party” in name or something Constitution-related in mission:

• Please send us a notarized copy of form 27(b) and attached straw, spun into gold.

• To expedite completion of this form, you can sign form 37(b)4-Part D, giving us your first-born child in perpetuity, but be warned that the notarization process must take place in the middle of an electrical storm. Give yourself ample time.

• Sign, notarize, and-write the first 3,094 digits of pi on the back of this form.

• Alternatively, you can name your second child “George W. Bush’s Presidency Was A Mistake” and “Ronald Reagan? More Like Satan Satan” and bypass forms AA-MM, but you still must complete the remaining 17 forms to the best of your ability.

• Append, along with records of all bodily functions performed by volunteers for your organization during the past fiscal year, sixteen signed copies of form 17B-c4, one folded neatly into an origami swan.

• Have you ever lusted in your heart? Provide a detailed confession below. You will need to have your husband or wife sign this.

• Include six completed Saturday New York Times crossword puzzles, with video footage of you completing them without Googling anything.

• Staple non-blurry photo of a yeti to the back of Form 3-4-32-7.

• Append Form 97.1F-(m/jj) with detailed, logical explanation of string theory.

• Did Sophie make the right choice? Explain, in Braille, on the back of form 8-9hh.

• Correctly complete six Cosmopolitan quizzes (Are You Uptight, Cool As A Cucumber, Or Everyone’s Doormat?) and include results as an addendum to Form 371b.

• Include recording of the sound of one hand clapping with completed forms 99-bbb through 101-aag.

• What is love?

• All of these forms must be delivered by pigeon to a gap that 8 inches wide that opens in an enchanted rock in the Toledo office between 3:32 and 3:30 p.m. on Feb. 29, if you are pure in heart and whisper the password. The password is on the 930th page of Proust’s “Remembrance of Things Past,” but it is only visible to people who have read all six volumes. Afterwards, take the pigeon home and teach it how to love.

• Go back in time and kill Hitler.

• Truly understand the musical contributions of Prince.

• I’m thinking of a number. What is it?

• Telephone this number and stay on hold for 8 hours. Do not hang up or wander off or the clock will reset.

• Attach detailed description of exactly what Meatloaf won’t do for love to the left corner of Form 1579.

(cont)

May 20, 2013 at 8:16 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

(cont)

Groups Without “Tea Party” or “Constitution” in names

• Please draw a picture of a spider.

• Here are three wines. Taste them. Compare them. If you like, drop Carol a note to say which one was your favorite. But no pressure, obviously.

• Did you enjoy the chocolates we sent? Good. This wasn’t a question, I just felt like checking in!

• Draw a picture of something that makes you happy

• How great is President Obama? (A) Great (B) Just super! (Either answer is acceptable.

• Here is a blank page. Write your name really big.

• Sign this form and mail it back for a free phone! Otherwise, no sweat.

• This form just contains the phone numbers of six young men we think would be good matches for your programming director Dana. Go get ‘em, Tiger!

• Make a dreamcatcher! Or don’t. Just thought you might have fun.

• Smile!

May 20, 2013 at 8:17 p.m.
alprova said...

Jack, you're bat crap crazy if you think I owe you an apology.

You started this mess and based on your responses, you have not taken a seconds worth of responsibility for it.

Right now, you're sticking your toes in the water, to test the temperature. If you decide to stick your foot in, the embarrassment you are currently experiencing will be nothing compared to what I will reveal if you keep pushing me.

Back off, Jack.

May 20, 2013 at 8:28 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Easy, you proved you're a certifiable loon.

May 20, 2013 at 8:30 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Porva. I'm knee-deep.

May 20, 2013 at 8:49 p.m.
alprova said...

Okay then. Would you like to discuss what happened in Hermosa Beach, California?

May 20, 2013 at 9:11 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Hahahaha. Never been there Alpy

May 20, 2013 at 9:15 p.m.
alprova said...

Intelius sez you were.

May 20, 2013 at 9:20 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Hermosa Beach? I wanna hear! Unless I get clarification, I'm gonna assume it had something to do with underage male sheep.

May 20, 2013 at 9:22 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

You're morphing into Easy, Alpy.

May 20, 2013 at 9:24 p.m.
Easy123 said...

I bet PlainTruth will be morphing into a new screen name soon.

May 20, 2013 at 9:26 p.m.
alprova said...

Wow!! I just flipped on the TV. Those tornadoes in Oklahoma are serious and are expected to have killed many.

I humbly apologize to everyone for including reference to them in a poor attempt at humor earlier. I had no idea at the time that these were F4 events.

Please...please Lord...don't let this be another tragedy where a bunch of elementary school children were killed.

I truly did not know until a few minutes ago that two elementary schools and entire neighborhoods were in the path of these tornadoes.

May 20, 2013 at 9:37 p.m.
alprova said...

PT...I'm sorry. You are not the man whom was referred to as having filed bankruptcy. I was wrong to allow my emotions to override my good sense.

Go ahead....beat me up. I deserve it.

May 20, 2013 at 9:41 p.m.
PlainTruth said...

Apology accepted

May 20, 2013 at 9:48 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Dang it! Can't impeach PT yet... it's premature.

May 20, 2013 at 10:04 p.m.
alprova said...

24 children unaccounted for.

May 20, 2013 at 10:07 p.m.
GratefulDawg said...

"Unless I get clarification, I'm gonna assume it had something to do with underage male sheep. --dude_abides"

Dude, are ewe suggesting someone here is on the lamb?

May 20, 2013 at 10:17 p.m.
dude_abides said...

Oh, now that's just baaaaaad. We bleating heart liberals need to pull the wool off of our eyes.

May 20, 2013 at 10:33 p.m.
Jt6gR3hM said...

Is there no decent people, on this web site, from the left that will speak out against the level of scum that is emanating from your side? I’m not talking about the usual childish calling of names and snide remarks. I’m talking about attempts to silence people with the threats of public humiliation. It is true that those on the right are just as disrespectful as any others but I have never witnessed in all the years of posting on web sites the level of personal destruction attempted on another poster as has been exhibited the last few days.

Are you so far gone that members you support can launch any vile attack or make fun of any tragedy as long as it promotes your viewpoint?

May 20, 2013 at 10:51 p.m.
limric said...

I am humbled by the great Peloponnese king 'Dudlonius_Abiadees'

"The cymbalism" By the gods man -LMAO

Hmm, speaking of sheep DeputyDawg -maybe someone 'shank'ed him. Oh Oh Oh!
Shorn of hedonistic flocking and abiding by no one, a woolen blanket of....Oh for gods sake LOL. I guess it's a 'Greek' thing.

BEEP - NO SOUP FOR ME!!

May 20, 2013 at 11 p.m.
acerigger said...

The White House released a photo of President Obama skeet shooting , Of course this has put the right-wing blogosphere into a tizzy. They have criticized the President for everything from his form to stating that the photo is staged or Photoshopped. No matter what the President does it will be wrong to those on the right, so I don't know why he even tries to please them.

Of course none of this compares to the Republican reaction to President Obama warning Americans of the dangers of eating yellow snow . Immediately after the address House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell held a press conference to announce the introduction a bill that would preserve the rights of Americans to eat yellow snow and to tout the health benefits of eating yellow snow. The Golden Retriever, Beagle, and Collie lobbyists appeared on stage behind Congressman Boehner and Senator McConnell with tails wagging which is being taken as a victory for their clients.

Shortly afterwards Rush Limbaugh went on the air and stated that conservatives across the southern states were up in arms about the socialist agenda that prevents snow from falling in the south, thus preventing southerners from enjoying yellow snow. The Drudge Report and Breitbart.com have picked up the story and have posted videos of a janitor working at the USDA stating that, “Yes…no snow…in…the south…socialism.” It is unknown at this time if the video was manipulated in anyway.Mark E Andersen

May 20, 2013 at 11:59 p.m.
alprova said...

JT, you hide behind the fact that all your previous posts were deleted from this site and are claiming you know nothing of them, but who do you think you are fooling?

All the regulars remember your posts. Everyone remembers your last miraculous meltdown that proved you are indeed a human with feelings, which was on the night of the Sandy Hook shootings.

All that aside, when I posted earlier this evening, I had no knowledge that the tornadoes in Oklahoma were deadly. I certainly had no knowledge that this was another deadly incident involving the deaths of school children.

Trust me...I've been on my knees, begging the Lord to forgive me for my horrible sins over the past couple of days.

I was dead wrong to post my extremely weak attempt at humor, which was a poke at all this crap about conspiracies and scandals that have become totally ridiculous. I flagged my own post, for what it's worth.

If you will also take notice, I have apologized to Jack for my scandalous and false accusation, which he graciously accepted. I know that my credibility has taken a deep hit and that I will have to endure a whole bunch of crap over it. So be it.

Whatever anyone does regarding what I have done, I will accept it like a man, I will not challenge anyone, nor will I attempt to defend what I did at all.

For my part, my little war is over, and my hope is that we can all attempt to be more civil to each other in the future so that things don't get out of control.

Easy...you're free to do as you please, but I am respectfully requesting you to join me in dispensing truths and facts, but not insults.

Life is simply too short to spend it arguing all the time, even if those we disagree with want to.

Okay friends and foes...fire away...

May 21, 2013 at 12:04 a.m.
PlainTruth said...

I think Alpy has been hacked. just kidding, Alp.

May 21, 2013 at 12:12 a.m.

AndrewLohr, rape and an abusive relationship are two different things, especially when it comes to a pregnancy resulting. I was raped when I was 17 and got pregnant. Although I am pro Choice, meaning a woman has the right to decide what to do with her body, does not mean I am pro abortion. I had the child and gave it up to adoption, I wish I would not have but stupid religious doctrine and teaching made me feel I had to so poo on your Sunny Pentecost Sunday. I was also married to a very abusive man in my early 20's and trust me it is two different things. You may think you are looking in in a way that gives you perspective but your not. You can never know what it is like to be in either situation, so why don't you save your comments for something you may actually be able to identify with.

June 9, 2013 at 7:47 a.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.