Posts
So I keep hearing/seeing the question, "Do you feel safer."
"Safer?"
Why a comparative analysis? Safer than I did before 9/11? On 9/11? Since? Since Obama took Office? Now that Bush is gone?Why is it on Obama to make me feel "safer" than I did 102 days ago? Were we less than safe then?
Frankly I've never really feared any foreign invasion and still do not. Maybe for a second on 9/11 but even then I don't think I felt less than safe. After watching Red Dawn as a teenager I probably welcomed an invasion somewhere deep down inside. No, when it comes to safe, I'd bet most would agree that domestic threats are more taxing on the ole confidence quotient. Hell they just arrested two kids for plotting a blood bath at my old High School (Covina High).
"Do you feel safer" is a rhetorical ploy to target Obama for any future attack and to make the assertion that YOU are NOT SAFE now that he's in charge. It's another 'failure' for which Limbaugh hopes and prays/preys.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I, for one, am not going to rely on any national talking head for my personal safety. I have faith that my nation, as a whole, will deal with international threats no matter who is in office. If my family is threatened the HNIC can just keep talking while I reload.
Sev - By HNIC, of course, you mean Hockey Night In Canada?
If you're going to be a bigot, at least be an honorable bigot and say it out loud in this anonymous forum.
To your legitimate point before you lost credibility with that "clever" acronym, President of the United States Barack Obama has only marginal control over our national safety. To act President of the United States Barack Obama needs congress, advisors, generals, intelligence, et al, all in agreeance.
When President of the United States Barack Obama's crafts a plan to limit defense spending by 0.8-percent (as President of the United States Barack Obama recently did) nearly every senator on both sides of the aisle pissed themselves silly and killed the bill.
Our safety is up to the 1 percenters -- the 2.3 million Americans in the military charged with protecting the other 300 million of us.
You go on and keep reloading your civilian weapons, cowboy. Because as long as you are mad with a gun, you are safe, yes?
Two blind men in a 50-year-old tank could kill you and everyone on your block in 20 minutes and never get a scratch.
Wow Schlong Blower, I have never had someone write something that I agreed with in such a shit for brains way. And just where the fuck did I say that HNIC was POTUS? Sarcasm is lost on the angry.
Tobold Hornblower said...
"Our safety is up to the 1 percenters -- the 2.3 million Americans in the military charged with protecting the other 300 million of us."
You mean those 2.3 million that B.H.O. and his Homeland security pit bull just lableled as potential "domestic terrorists?"
Hornsniffing ToeHolder here:
I am assuming this is what you meant?
"Department of Homeland Security report - Rightwing Extremism: Current Economic and Political Climate Fueling Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment.
From page 2 of the report:
Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment tool.
Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms ownership and use.
Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns and leverage them as drivers for recruitment."----
Sounds like a homeland security hedge against OKC nut-job types to me.
If Timmy McVeigh and Terry Nichols are both malcontents in the military, does it not stand to reason we keep an eye on the dishonorably discharged of that 1 percent? The ones who screamed out at their discharge hearing, "We're going to take back this country?"
Especially the ones who are anti-social, anti-establishment clinical paranoids with a pick-up truck loaded with Ammonium Sulfate and 15 semi-automatic weapons?
I guess it depends on how you (or they) define “rightwing extremist.”
Regardless, if someone thinks they are the target of this report, they probably should be.
No..I am talking about page 8 where it target returning veterens from the gulf war and desert storm. I agree that the concerns should be placed on individuals like McViegh but it is damned irresponsible to lump returning veterens into the report.
"Regardless, if someone thinks they are the target of this report, they probably should be."
Yup...you hit that right on the head.
But that goes for the Patriot act as well...if ya got nothing to hide ya got nothing to worry about.
Post a Comment