CWC01

I must have missed something. I did not know Obama was running for president this time around! Someone better let Obama know. [video:youtube]

Obama is/was so great Michigan went red and we elected Trump. Wait, wut?

It's gotta sting a little. DU gets blasted out of existence, Trump smashes Hilldog, and the Democrats get their stool pushed in dry...all on the same day. Not so smug now, are you guys? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/10/the-decimation-of-the-democratic-party-visualized/

What goes around comes around.

yeah, but you keep taking right-of-center stances on positions so Ivan, naturally, must contradict you Everything looks right of center when you're carrying the water for fascists.

You can't get a gun if you are a convicted felon, have a mental health history, have a domestic disturbance restriction order, and any number of other parameters. The second amendment, as SCOTUS has outline and just last week upheld by refusing to review a gun restriction law, is not universal. If Congress votes in a law that says if your on the No Fly list -- it IS just that simple. The logic that you are unsafe enough to jump on a SW flight to Vegas but ok to pickup the latest semi-automatic with a few hundred rounds of ammo is, well, astonishing. it sounds like ya'll are in something like agreement - folks shouldn't be able to buy a gun if they're not trusted to fly either, but the process of deciding who's on that list needs to be just (and lord knows there must be many devils hiding in all those details) the constitutional scholars will no doubt remind us that you have an expressly granted right to bear arms but no such specific right to fly, thus the later is far easier to tamper w/ than the former Correct, there is no Due Process involved in placing names on the No Fly List. All that takes place is someone at the FBI decides arbitrarily a person is a threat (maybe even a similar name) and on the list they go. Regardless of your stand on guns, taking away someone's rights should involve Due Process. It is in the constitution after all.

Keeping terrorism and national security out of the news is probably the best way for Democrats to stay in the Whitehouse. When terrorism comes up we start to focus on how Obama and Clinton got people killed and then lied about it to congress. And that pesky FBI investigation. Know what would be interesting? If those guns Obama marched across the Mexican border started showing up in theater.

i can't speak for the ACLU so perhaps the resident Hairy Hermit can weigh in i suspect them nice fellers at the 'U though aren't per se opposed to the concept of a no-fly list so much as the manner in which said list is compiled and kept and challengeable - i imagine to a good extent too that you're arguing just to argue - i doubt you'd want a guy the fbi has monitored hanging out on isis-websites and posting repeatedly on social media about the awesomeness of that organization to be able to either board a plane or buy an ar-15 ('specially when folks up-thread were arguing said people should be executed w/o even a trial?) maybe it's just a word game, but you're not being "dis-armed" in theory here, you're being "denied more arms than you had already" No, I'm in favor of Due Process. How a person gets on the No Fly List is exactly the point if you're going to use it to remove constitutional rights. Claiming terrorism is the justification for removing rights is a deflection from the real issue which is domestic and national security. The breakdown was simply within how we admit immigrants and how we identify and monitor domestic and international threats. It's just convenient to try to make it a plank political issue otherwise the administration has to admit it failed at doing one of it's primary jobs. Here it is argued in congress, I know icky Republican but you get the point.

Are you talking about The Patriot Act, and it was signed by Bush. Now, don't you have some donkeys to fuck? Or maybe your daddy is waiting for you in a tool shed? Bush has been gone a long time, what has the current president done to reverse the unconstitutional misdeeds of the last president? Hint: nothing.

answer: no The ACLU has been arguing for quite some time that the No Fly List represents a violation of Due Process. The current administration just recommended we use the No Fly List to deny American citizens their second amendment rights. Recap: violate due process to disarm citizens for their beliefs. Fascism. From the left unsurprisingly.

I was gone for four days and come back to the most ridiculous spew in a while. I mean, true, we always have assholekisser's idiocy. I guess you are right though - a dose of Trumpisms plus Chode-licker and Spray has taken a death spiral to new lows. Fuck I hope this rain doesn't wash too much snow in the mountains. Freshies!! Hey asswipe, how come you are not apologizing for what Trump is saying? After all, you are responsible for his words and actions. He is clearly advocating for fascist dictatorship. So that makes you for fascist dictatorship. Isn't that what we have now? An administration advocating suspending due process to disarm civilians while telling them what to think.

"If my aunt had balls she'd be my Uncle" Good luck with the excuse "it was bound to happen anyway".

wasn't it promoted by every human being who hoped the middle-east could be more than a collection of despots? No, I don't think so. The Arab spring was a fundamentalist uprising supported by groups the world intelligence communities considered terrorist organizations. The Arab spring movement became ISIS. The naive American news outlets seemed to espouse the virtues of revolution in the Middle East without paying much attention who was behind it. Naturally the Obama administration, and Clinton by extension, would have you think "climate change" is behind the Arab spring otherwise Obama would have to own his failed foreign policy. Much the same way Obama, and Clinton, wanted to blame Benghazi on a Youtube video. your assertion would seem far less silly if, in fact, tunisia, libya & egypt were currently isis hot spots - they ain't. you seem to have this climate change thing deep in your teeth. ISIL/ISIS by its very name is centralized in Iraq and Syria. Libya has some ISIS factions but they had their own fundies deposing Daffy. Egypt's military interdicted. Tunisia seems to be the only country to have some stability besides Egypt without the major organized military. Point being the destabilization gave rise to the fundamentalists. While Obama applauded regime change he seriously underestimated what would happen after. Much the same way he underestimated what would happen in Iraq if we simply left as they requested. It's all the same failed foreign policy. But no, not everyone supported the Arab spring. Climate change really is not related, I can't help that our inept president decided to adopt it as his excuse d'jour. Instead of recognizing actual causes of problems that is what Obama ran with. Vote differently next time if you don't like that I speak to his points.

Ironic considering the unending blame placed on Bush. Now that Obama actually has a record, and in his second term, people who were eager to blame everything on Bush are blaming youtube videos, global warming, and inanimate objects on the incontrovertible failures of the Obama administration. There are plenty of problems in this country that aren't Obama's fault but foreign policy and national security are specifically the administration's responsibility.

wasn't it promoted by every human being who hoped the middle-east could be more than a collection of despots? No, I don't think so. The Arab spring was a fundamentalist uprising supported by groups the world intelligence communities considered terrorist organizations. The Arab spring movement became ISIS. The naive American news outlets seemed to espouse the virtues of revolution in the Middle East without paying much attention who was behind it. Naturally the Obama administration, and Clinton by extension, would have you think "climate change" is behind the Arab spring otherwise Obama would have to own his failed foreign policy. Much the same way Obama, and Clinton, wanted to blame Benghazi on a Youtube video.