Barack Obama: Hypocrite-in-Chief

Amy: How quick you are to condemn before the investigations have been completed. You seize any opportunity to discredit the President and cast aspersions on his patriotism. I would question if your patriotism is for America or for the Republic -ans.

Referee33: "Quick to condemn?" Have you been following Hasan's story? The facts are there if you chose to open your eyes and admit it. Do you believe Hasan to be innocent, ref? There were many eye witness accounts - from people Hasan didn't manage to kill. Are they making it all up?

Obama doesn't have any patritotism towards this country. He wants to tear it down and rebuild it as a socialist nation. We are seeing that now - which is why people are not following him like mindless zombies anymore. They got more "change" than they "hoped" for when they voted this clown into office.
And my patriotism is for this great country - and conservative values.

"On Sunday, Army Chief of Staff George W. Casey Jr. cautioned troops against jumping to conclusions about what might have motivated Hasan ..."

Why a four star general would "refuse to acknowledge this and instead bend over backwards to protect the Muslim community from what THEY may perceive to be a "backlash" is beyond me." Another enemy appeaser perhaps?

This is beginning to look like the army ignored the obvious warning signals ... kind of like when Bush ignored the warning signals for 9/11.

I wonder, was there a Presidential Daily Briefing on Hasan?

Amy: My comment was directed to you condemning the President for his comments. And yes I believe Hasan is innocent, don't you? Or are you forgetting one of the basic beliefs held by most of the citizens of this country, innocent until proven guilty. I hadn't heard that the trial for Hasan was over yet, much less started. For that matter, has he even been charged?
If Pres. Obama is trying to change this country into a socialist nation that would be an improvement from the fascist nation we now are.

Major Nidal Malik Hasan sounds a lot like ahemmer, they are both on attack. Amy will use anything and everything, real or imaginative, to attack the President with her pen.

"Why shy away from the truth? Why must we all pretend that violent sects within the Muslim faith do not exist? Why not admit that people within the Muslim faith are following an extremist call to kill those who do not agree with their own beliefs?"

The radical Republicans, like Amy, will do anything to those who do not agree with their own beliefs. It will not belong before they, "the conservatives", have their own home grown terrorist. It sounds like Amy wants a President that will declare a war on Muslims! Two crazy people, Major Nidal Malik Hasan and Amy Geiger-Hemmer.

Excellent Amy, another great blog!

Funny that you get accused to "Quickly condemn" yet you waited 4 days to gather your facts and post this blog? Obama admittedly said he didn't know the fact about the Gates arrest but blamed the white police officer for participating in a racial profiling.

Did you hear Nidal Malik Hasan is now talking to investigators. I am sure he will says he did attend that mosque but didn't hear any of those sermons that denounce America. He'll probably say something like . . . "the mosque was like family to me". Or maybe that any derogatory statements said against America . . . "were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity,"

"......a guilty Muslim terrorist in Texas."

I was not aware that our judicial system had changed and that we no longer waited until a criminal charge had been filed, and a guilty verdict had been handed down before we made these type of statements.

From someone as "patriotic" as you, Amy - I would think you would appreciate and respect the US legal system.....or does that only apply when it suits your "conservative values" aka Right Wing agenda?

There is a huge difference between a "reasonable doubt of innocence" and being "positively guilty".

Maybe this is just another difference in the way the left and right think? The really sad part about this whole incident is that Hasan didn't die!

If anyone out there doesn't think/know that Hasan murdered our solders, is really acting "Stupidly". It probably would be too much to ask for any posts about the real subject here . . . the hypocrisies of Obama.

If the news media is correct, my question would be why didn't the FBI/CIA share the information that they had on this guy with the Army?

If we can't protect our military on their bases here at home, that is a big problem for all of us.

Condolences to those that were injured or killed. What a waste.

Oh look a possible mulsim religious extremist murdering people, justified by his Religion

It's funny how your so quick to draw on this one, but defended the christian religous Abortion doctor murderer of George Tiller.

Amy thinks Barak Obama is a terrorist.

I don't know why anybody would be surprised that AMY would use the murder of 12 people to advance her extremism and anti-liberal and Obama hatred.

Jake - "possible Muslim religious extremist" . . . come on, "possible"?

Isn't this political correctness what caused this incident? Hasan "is" a Muslim religious extremist and he "Did" murder our soldiers.

Now, let's talk about Obama, is he being a hypocrite here or not? Did he use the same thought process to make his statement about Hasan as he did about the Gates incident?

The only "possible" here is that it is quite "possible" Obama is a racist based on what he said and when he said it. From all evidence in reference to these two separate incidents, it appears so. I would have gave Obama the benefit of doubt but his comments about Hasan make a pretty clear case he is a hypocrite.

2cenets...when you deal with the lefty loons like Jacob, jmark, and ref33 (who wasn't this way a years or so ago) that's what you get. Liberals like him can't or don't know how to leave their sheep mentality.

Fact1: Nidal Malik Hasan is an ati-Americanm Muslim ewhoi hates America. These fact are on his own website and in his emails, etc.

Fact2: Nidal Malik Hasan was seen shooting unarmed and innocent peiple before a local police officer shot and seriously wounded him thus saving more lives.

Fact3: liberals, especially or own village idiots right here, try to deny all this by their debating these facts for all to read.

Fact4: now you know why I left liberalsim 2cents. I know you do, but those that are still stuck with the sheep dog leading them are clueless.

Fact: Liberals would be all over this story and condemning Nidal Malik Hasan if he were a Christian right-wing extremist. No doubt about it. But, because he is a Muslim, we have to ignore his religion. Try to say it didn't play a role in the killings this monster committed and you'd be lying. Shariah law - which radical Islamists tend to practice - encourages it's followers to kill and use violence.
But, in our hand-wringing society, we cannot offend Muslims, now, can we? (Christians are fair game -no problem there!) And that is a big part of the problem of why, when, and how Hasan was able to carry out these horrific murders - because the sensitive, touchy-feely, easily offended society we have created via the ACLU types allowed Hasan to carry out his crimes! People were afraid to report his radical, dangerous behavior for fear of being labeled "discriminatory." Oh, what a sorry state we are in - when we are more worried about offending a small group of people than protecting the lives of Americans! That's Obama's America!

Forgot to add, I agree with 2Cents: too bad this monster of a human being, Nidal Malik Hasan, survived. (And this is where the media's attempt to blame the army on Hasan's condition - that he was soon to be deployed, he was distraught, upset that Obama hadn't gotten troops out of Iraq and Afghanistan.... boo hoo hoo....just doesn't work.) No, instead he had a plan, and that plan was to kill as many infidels as he could - 13 people. And he injured 30 more. (Hasan told a neighbor prior to the shooting that he was going to "do God's work.") Too bad he survived the carnage he created.

Christian Dem and Referee33: You believe Hasan to be innocent? And like 2Cents says, there is something called common sense when dealing with "presumed to be innocent" and "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt." Perhaps you both blame Bush and Cheney for the attacks? Obama probably will get around to that...

Amy, I did not say at any time in my post that I believed this guy was innocent! I said that according to the United States of America's judicial code that everyone, regardless of what religion they are, is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW. You are making these statements merely because this man is Muslim. You pointed out that the media would be all over this if he were Christian - the fact is, YOU would be approaching this from a different angle if he was Christian - then he wouldn't be a terrorist - he would just be a "true American" or defending the "Conservative Values" you rant about.
But be clear about one thing, I am not defending his actions, and I am not defending Obama's actions. Perhaps Obama learned from his rash remarks the first time, or perhaps he just feels this situation is a tad bit more serious (ya think?!) and deserves some rational investigation before anyone jumps the gun and makes inaccurate or biased remarks without getting FACTS. Oh...wait - kinda like you are.

CD - "You are making these statements merely because this man is Muslim."

No, I believe we are making these comments because HASAM IS GUILTY AS HELL. Your judicial code is for those we aren't positive are guilty, which isn't the case here. It's a shame the amount of time and money that will spent to glorify this piece of $..t

You watch, this will spark the Muslims that are on the edge of the radical side of Islam to do harm. Who's picture are we seeing on an hourly basis on most every news network. We should be seeing the faces of the victims, not this guilty Radical Muslim murderer.

And if Obama really took this serious, he wouldn't deny we are at war against radical Islam. In stead, he changes the name to "The Overseas Contingency Plan", why, because it is politically correct with the Muslims. Horse crap!

"fear of being labeled discriminatory" or maybe we should use Obama's favorite word . . . . "disproportionately profiled". I mean, isn't it a fact that every 911 terrorist was Muslim as well as in almost every single terrorist act around the world, going back to the 70's? But liberalism says we shouldn't profile these radicals Muslims?

I ask you CD, what facts are missing here?

Jim: After reading your latest unintelligible (have you been hitting the sauce?) posting I have to wonder, did you leave liberalsim [sic] voluntarily, or were you kicked out?

moonbat: From what I've read so far, no one here is defending Hasan, much less defending him "because he is a Muslim". That belief is a product of your delusional thinking.

Let's be honest, this rant of yours is not about Hasan, or his religion, it's about your adolescent obsessive hatred towards the president.

Please seek psychiatric help. Take Hayett with you.

Ignore jmark, 2Cents. He obviously has nothing of value to add, so he has to attack you. How unusual....

Anyhow, if anyone will recall, the President of the United States original response to this horrific attack didn't address the important issues of national security, but rather focused on his political aspects (how surprising! This coming from the same man who today gave a speech about the Berlin Wall - (yet refused to go there on this historic day)...and NEVER even mentioned Ronald Reagan nor Margaret Thatcher. He did, however, manage to insert his own name in his speech - as usual - as well as JFK's. The man has no concept of true American history....and an ego too large to fathom.)
Anyhow, to get to my point, Obama refused to address the Ft. Hood incident until he had time to talk about Native Americans at a "Tribal Natives" conference. Obama had learned about the Ft. Hood incident hours beforehand. He went on for a full two minutes about how his administration was going to cater to this group, and then he finally mentioned Ft. Hood. (Does this ring a bell about Michael Moore and the lefties criticizing Bush for a slow reaction in a Florida classroom to 9/11? Think Moore will make a movie on Obama's initial public reaction - even though Obama had hours to ponder his initial response?) Obama mentioned the attack at Ft. Hood, sympathized with the soldiers and families, and went on to conclude his speech talking about how important his conference was and the years to come of government work with Native Americans. Hmmmm. Seems our Commander-in-Chief then headed off to his next engagement. Wow.
As a side note, guess who visited Ft. Hood the night of the attacks to comfort the soldiers and wounded? George and Laura Bush.

jmark...is fact #3 why you attack me and not the truth?

Fact1: Nidal Malik Hasan is an anti-American Muslim who hates America. These facts are on his own website and in his emails, etc.

Fact2: Nidal Malik Hasan was seen shooting unarmed and innocent people before a local police officer shot and seriously wounded him thus saving more lives.

Fact3: liberals, especially or own village idiots right here, try to deny all this by their debating these facts for all to read.

Fact4: now you know why I left liberalism. But those that are still stuck with the sheep dog leading them are clueless.

jmark, I obviously left on my own. Unlike you, I knew when I was being lead by an anti-American ideology. Too bad you can't raise yourself to some degree of intelligence and realize the same mistake I made.

I did forget to applaud Christian Democrat for apologizing for Obama, something he isn't man enough to do.

Yea Amy, I know about jmark and his Bush problem too. And OMG, now it seems he's one of those 911 Truthers.

BTW, has anyone heard from Janet Ann Napolitano lately? Is she still alive or did Al-Qaeda get her?

The fact that I referenced your quote: "because he is a Muslim" indicates my attack was directed towards you hemmer, not 2cents. Moonbat.

No Jim, the reason I attack you is related to fact#5.

Fact5: Liberals derive great pleasure in exposing the deeply flawed beliefs of dogmatic dipsticks.

I don't have a bush problem. I keep it neatly trimmed.

15-20% of doctors belong to the AMA ... well, that's if you don't have an understand of fifth grade math.

AMA? . . . I think you got the wrong blog pussface!

Amy

Quote from Mr Spock

"Nowhere am I so desperately needed as among a shipload of illogical humans."
--Spock in 'I, Mudd'

And quite the shipload is what I have read above, starting with your attempt to compare Obama's actions regarding a rather mild racist incident in which the only thing hurt were feelings, to the mass murder and maiming that Hasan perpetrated .... and YES he did it, c'mon people !!

And yes he is a radical Muslim who used his religion as an excuse for senseless killing --- just as there are radical Christians, Jews, Hindus and whatever other religious nuts, who have done the same and will do the same.

But to infer that Obama in some way is somehow guilty after the fact --- when he, as president, is using his good judgment to help ease tensions among the people who live in this "melting pot" called the USA --- portrays you as not only in need in a course in logical thinking, but also some common sense.

Dave

I like it how the Rightwingers and the Centrists are so easily drawn into the liberal bashing.

Keep on proving my point. I luv it.

2Cetns "Jake - "possible Muslim religious extremist" . . . come on, "possible"? Well, untill I get better picture of why he murdered 12 people (mental illness, religion, etc...), I am going to hold my opinion. I do not jumo to conclusions, based on reaction.

Isn't this political correctness what caused this incident? Hasan "is" a Muslim religious extremist and he "Did" murder our soldiers. - I guess we'll find out, for are much as we know that the signs were ignored, or as other's have said "they never thought he was a man to do such things". Again, we do not have enough information.


Now, let's talk about Obama, is he being a hypocrite here or not? Did he use the same thought process to make his statement about Hasan as he did about the Gates incident?
- No I think he's learned to keep his foot out of his mouth.

The only "possible" here is that it is quite "possible" Obama is a racist based on what he said and when he said it. From all evidence in reference to these two separate incidents, it appears so. I would have gave Obama the benefit of doubt but his comments about Hasan make a pretty clear case he is a hypocrite.

- Maybe you watch to much Glenn Beck, if Obama was racist maybe he needs to beat up his "white half".

Amy's use of violence to perpetaute her Ideology:

1) Tom Barret's beating used for Concel/Open Carry
2) Hasan murder of 12 people to attack liberals and Obama
3) ?

Seriouly, the 3rd time Amy it's a pattern.

During the election AMY compared Obama to a terrorist.

Amy is using these murders to push her agenda forward.

2cents: "Your judicial code is for those we aren't positive are guilty". Are you serious? What's next? Will the judicial code only be for those that are Caucasian, or only for those that are heterosexual, or only for those that are Christian or only for those that are members of the blond haired, blue eyed Aryan nation? The philosophy coming from the right is absolutely scary.
You know, if both Bush and Obama took this war on terror seriously, we would have reinstated the draft. This incident will be happening more often as the stresses of this "war", that are being born by so few, become too much for them to handle.
Where in Tim McVeigh's bio did I miss that he was a Muslim?
Where in Ted Kaczynski's bio did I mess that he was a Muslim?

Jake - "Well, until I get a better picture of why he murdered 12 people" - well you're halfway there, at least you admit he's a murderer.

What signs are you referring to . . . that Hasan was radical about Islam and he was planing to kill his fellow soldiers.

If you don't think there is enough evidence then please check you local listings or Google it!

Yea, I know, there is absolutely no reason to think Obama is a racist . . . gee, maybe I am just a typical white person?

2cents - From what it seems at the moment that he became more religiously radicalized as time went by, yet there could also be a "mental" aspect to why he suddenly went homicidal.
Don't misunderstand me, we have christians in thsi country who murder abortion doctors becuase they think they are moraly justified.
In my POV it goes to show how people use their relgion to justify murder. Christian, Jew, and Muslim. All is bad. And this is one of my main problems with all organized religions.

As far as Obama being a racist, I have yet to see any conlusive evidence, behavioural patterns, from his words or professional actions that backs that accusation up. Seriously, just look at this inner circle, cabinet, and advisors its a pretty mixed racial bag.
David Axelrod, Robert Gibbs? If their black then so amy I?

Jacob Pickard: ...and we have abortion doctors who murder innocent babies before they are born for the sake of convenience.
Say what you will, but the President and the media are downplaying the Muslim terrorist story. After all, this IS the first terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11. Think the media will go with that in the headlines? Fat chance. This event happened on Obama's watch. (Bush will eventually be blamed, tho -it's a no-brainer.)
And we cannot blame the Muslim religion -it is a religion of....peace....yeah...right.....Keep saying that over and over and you might start believing it. Even though Shariah law justifies and DEMANDS violence. ("To whoever kills even one single infidel of those who rule over Islamic lands, either secretly or openly, there is a reward like a reward from all the living ones of the Islamic world. And let every individual of the Muslims in whatever place they may be, take upon him an oath to kill at least three or four of the ruling infidels, enemies of Allah, and enemies of religion." - Ottoman cleric - Sheikh Shawish - 1915.) Just like Obama is all about hope....and...change...and....hope....and...change...
Face it, libs. Your fearless leader is afraid to confront and speak out about an internal national security threat - radical Muslims. Radical Muslims who are in the United States. A radical Muslim terrorist who is responsible for the first terrorist attack on U.S. soil since 9/11. Instead, Obama's first reaction is to address Native Americans at a Tribal Convention - even tho Obama knew about the deaths/attack for several hours. He actually gave "shout outs" to certain people in the audience! Embarrassing - yes. The President of the USA giving "shout outs" prior to addressing people on the Ft. Hood incident. Obama IS a neophyte man-child!
And political correctness is partially responsible for the deaths of 13 innocent people at Ft. Hood.

ref - "What's next .......blond haired, blue eyed Aryan nation? The philosophy coming from the right is absolutely scary.

That "would" be scary, who was it that said that? Oh, it was you ref, because nowhere in any of my posts did I say any of those things. If you want to pretend, it's your right.

ref - "Where in Ted Kaczynski's & Tim McVeigh's bio did I miss that they were Muslim?"

What's your point, go back and read my post . . . I did say "almost", yes? Besides, you're debating this based on two guys who were paramilitary.

Jake - "Don't misunderstand me, we have christians in thsi country who murder abortion doctors . . ."

Humm, I think doctors have murdered more Christians babies but you haven't mentioned it once, why?

Again, I have no problem going on the record saying that I think Obama has shown me evidence he is racist. I am entitled to my opinion, and so are you.

Abortion? Amy, can you go a single day without linking dead babies to every debate.

2cents: Paramilitary? WTF are you talking about?

"The bombing killed 168 people and was the deadliest act of terrorism within the United States prior to the September 11, 2001 attacks."

According to wikipedia, he was a card carrying member of the NRA, a registered Republican, and was raised a Roman Catholic who often attended daily Mass.

And if Bush had taken this act of terrorism seriously he would have declared war against Catholicism.

The last VP was right because of Obamas policy we were attacked by terrorist again

Amy - Typical, you view Scott Schroeer as a hero. You approve of the murder of abortion doctors.

@2cents: I have listened to the right do the "what if?" gambit for months. What if that had been George Bush? Read Amy's comment - "liberals would be all over this story......if he were a Christian right wing extremist" I never said that you made those remarks. I made them. In the same spirit of "pretend" that the right wing does. Nothing more than a logical progression of events.
Yes, you did say almost, I must have missed that, like I missed mentioning the terrorist attacks of the Tamil Tigers, the Chechen rebels, the drug cartels, the IRA and on and on. Since terrorist attacks are perpetrated by Muslims, those groups must be Muslim also.
Your statement about "two guys who were paramilitary", what is your point? Should the government be profiling them as well as Muslims?

If Religion is the Basis for terrorsim than AMY H supports the murder of DR. Tiller by the Christian terrorist Scott Schorder.

Amy supports terrorsim, but only if it is based in christianity.

Actually ref if you remeber everybody thought that Oklahom was done by Ilsamic terrorists, but it was a homegrownm anti-government American, much like teh radical tea Baggers we have now.

"I know in my heart that I am right in my struggle, Steve. I have come to peace with myself, my God and my cause. Blood will flow in the streets, Steve. Good vs. Evil. Free Men vs. Socialist Wannabe Slaves. Pray it is not your blood, my friend."

Good vs. Evil, Socialist Wannabe Slaves. McVeigh would fit in perfectly with today's wingnuts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh

Your right Amy during the Obama administration no Islamic terrorist plots have been broken up.

And we all know this one doesn't count:
On September 23, federal authorities arrested Illinois resident Michael Finton for attempting to bomb the federal courthouse in Springfield. An undercover FBI officer posing as a low-level Al Qaeda operative provided Finton with inert explosives, which he planted in front of the Paul Findley Federal Building and Courthouse
URL: http://www.adl.org/main_Terrorism/september_2009_terror_plots.htm

2cents- so you approve of Christian murdering Abortion doctors as well? So murder justifiation is based on ones religion? Right?

Amy - And the bible approves of killing homosexuals as well. Do you approve of that? Actually it is stoning them to death? Justification of murder is not mutally exclusive to Islam.

This debate shows that terrorism is based on religion and poltics:

Amy thinks Barak Obama is a terrorist among other things while celebreating the murder of an abortion doctor by a radical christian extremist which is not an act of terrorism, the murder by JimAdkison of the liberal chruch, and Timothy Mveigh, but at the same time condeming the seemingly-Islamic extremist murder by Lt. Hasan and this is an act of terrorism.

Simple Math:

Anti-Goverment Christian Rightwinger Murder = not terrorism and Justified.

Anti-Government Islamic Rightwinger = Terrorist and murder.

Only difference is the religion, other than that the right lately has more in common with Radical Conservative Islamic Militants than they realize.

JP doctors help people,heal people, and care for people Tiller was A murderer and was ABORTED

bring on the liberal hunting season

Amy - Do you think that liberals are domestic terrorists?

Amy - If liberals are destroying America, and Hasan murdered soldiers and he is a terrorist, what does that make liberals?

Should Liberals be shot in self-defense of this COuntry. Would a anti-liberal patriot be justified in killing a lberal since we are destroying this country?

You obvioulsy think that Scott Roedor was justified in killing doctor Tiller becuas you think abortion is murder, why not go a step further and justify the killing of liberals since we are destroying the countey?

papamuskie - So if you shot a liberal and killed him or her, you would be jusitifed then sicne you are protecting America?

papamuskie- "bring on the liberal hunting season "

You just made a physical threat against me.

Jake - 2cents- so you approve of Christian murdering Abortion doctors as well?

Did I say that, gee, I looked back and can't find it anywhere? Why is it that the left always wants to profusely "LIE" about what someone else says. Do you really think this tactic is necessary? Lie about what I say and I will call you a liar!

2cetns- "Humm, I think doctors have murdered more Christians babies but you haven't mentioned it once, why?"

So this does not sound like a comdentation to me. If we are goign to play the game of "terrorist", then terrorsim is home grown and christian as well, not just muslim.

Jake, instead of answering my question you lied about what I said. If you think this is a game, it's one you will have to play yourself.

ref - Thanks for coming clean, really. Please, if you have a beef with Amy, she's a big girl so take it up with her.

Any group that is known to harm any people in this country, I believe it is our government's #1 job to keep us safe. Whatever it takes to do so is fine with me, I have nothing to hide.

2cents: Thanks for coming clean? I don't understand. Please explain. No beef with Amy, other than difference of philosophy, used her statement as an example of the "what if" because it was in the comments of this blog and easy to find.
"Whatever it takes to do so is fine with me, I have nothing to hide" Does that mean if the government decides to eliminate the rights guaranteed you by the Constitution in order to "keep us safe", you have no problem with that?

referee33: Funny you should bring up the Constitution. You know, that document that the liberals want to totally ignore in mandating that everyone have health insurance - whether they want it or not.... That little document that keeps getting in the way of Obama's plans for America.... And I am so sick of lefties saying we lost "rights" to keep us safe. What "rights" did you lose, ref? Give me one example. Just one. Unless you were a terrorist, or associated with terrorist groups, I doubt that your phone lines were tapped and your home searched. So tell me, ref. I'd like to know.

Jacob Pickard: Do you ever go back and read your comments? You remind me of a little child tugging at an adults sleeve, demanding attention. Your comments aren't worth the effort, however, I will give a brief response you can settle down before you go off and pout. You just look foolish. And your statements about what I believe are not true. I do not approve of anyone murdering abortion doctors. I don't approve of what abortion doctors do, but I don't they shouldn't be killed. So stop saying I believe otherwise. And just because I believe that liberalism is destroying the United States does not mean I think liberals should be killed. (Wow - you sure go to "extremes.") All it takes to destroy liberallism is: facts, patriotism, and common sense. Throw in moral values and libs don't stand a chance. Wait and see what 2010 and 2012 bring.

To be honest Amy I could care less.

It's obvious that you have a double standard on about this killer based on their religious background.

Muslim = Terrorist
Christian = Garden vareity murderer

Papapmuski just threatened me and you stand idely by and let it happen. And you wonder why I question you and your side becuase comments like you keep making "liberals are destroying America" rhetoric is dangerous.
So please answer this question an I will leave you alone are liberals as dangerous as Islamic terrorists?

Jacob Pickard: Too funny. Papa Muskie just verbally threatened you and I am supposed to do something? Like what? You are a big boy. I'm not fighting your battles for you. How old are you anyhow?

As for your silly question: Liberals don't strap bombs on themselves and kill innocent people simply because they do not agree with their religious beliefs. Liberals don't kill people in order to get to heaven and get their fair share of virgins. Liberals don's shoot innocent people in massacres like the recent event at Ft. Hood. Terrorists do. Terrorists use violence. Terrorists murder innocent people to promote their cause.
Liberals use words to promote their causes. They use words to tax us all to death. They use words to set in place a socialist agenda for this great country of ours. A socialist agenda that the majority does not want -and hopefully will not allow to happen.
Judging from my two descriptions, I would have to say that Islamic terrorist are more dangerous to the lives of innocent people than liberals.

There, Jacob Pickard, you have my answer. You said you will stop tugging at my sleeve, so please do so, now. Or I will send you to your room with no supper!

Amy: Did you read the comment or not? My guess is that you read it but chose to focus on key words only. If you would read it carefully, you'll note that I said "if" not did. Meaning, that going forward, if the government ignored parts of the Constitution, 2cents would be OK with that, because it kept us safe. But to answer your question. One example. Freedom of the press. The press was not allowed to photograph flag draped coffins returning from the war in Iraq. Another example. Freedom of speech. McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act restricted non-profit advocacy groups from mentioning the name of the candidate in ads placed thirty days prior to a general election. Another example. Not a specific one, but a statement of attitude that suggests the right would be ignored. Petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Quote from George Bush during an interview with Bob Woodward, Nov. 17, 2002. "I'm the commander, see.I do not need to explain why I say things. That's the interesting part about being the President. Maybe somebody needs to to me why they say something, but I don't feel like I owe anybody an explanation."

And referee33: How were YOUR rights infringed upon by the press not being allowed to photograph coffins? How were YOUR rights infringed upon by advocacy groups not being able to mention a candidate's name in a tv ad? Ridiculous! Your previous comment implies we lived in state of fear during the Bush years - that our houses would be searched, we'd be thrown in jail for no reason, etc. Yet, the two examples you cite are so lame as to be laughable. And, you have yet to mention how YOUR specific rights were taken away... Just how did any of these so-called denied "rights" change your day or the way you lived your life?

As for the flag-draped coffins - the same journalists who complained about Bush not allowing photographs are now the ones that don't even care about taking pics, now that Obama OK'd such photography. Think the press just wanted to have more ammo to use against Bush? So where are all these photos' of flag-draped coffins now that B.O. is prez? Politics. That's all that was. And Bush was right to such a thing during a time of war. Certain things are appropriate to do during a time of war, ref. Such photos can aid the enemy. It doesn't take much thought to reach such a conclusion.
Along that same train of thought, where, oh where, is Cindy Sheehan? The darling of the left? Is she camped out in a tent outside of Obama's house in Chi-town? Protesting the war in Iraq? With journalists photographing her and reporting on her almost daily? No - they are nowhere to be found! Cindy is gone! Politics. Just politics. Sheehan and the press didn't like Bush. The press REALLY didn't like Bush. That's it - plain and simple. That is the ONLY reason they wanted to photograph coffins - to get Bush. Now with Obama in office, and easy access to photo's - just where ARE those photos?

Amy: So to you it only matters if the loss of rights happens to you personally? I'm of the opinion of if it happens to any US citizen or group of citizens, it has happened to me. Apparently you are more self centered than I thought.

"And Bush was right to do such a thing during a time of war. Certain things are appropriate to do during a time of war"

We're still in a time of war, in fact the "war on terror" could go on into perpetuity. Using your logic, the president could round up all Muslims and hold them in detention until the war is over. I'm sure many on the right would deem that as being appropriate.

You're unwittingly making a case for an imperial presidency. No checks or balances on the power of the presidency needed, all that's required is a subjective measure of appropriateness. Constitution be damned.

Actually jmark, Franklin Roosevelt, via executive order 9066, had 120,000 Japanese Americans put into War Relocation Camps in the United States during World War II. And FDR was a....Democrat!

And instead of the current "Ostrich culture" which seems to exist - burying our heads in the sand and ignoring the internal radical Muslim threat within our own borders - you may be on to something. We SHOULD be looking at radical Muslims - especially within our military ranks. And we SHOULD do something about it. Who cares if a select group of Muslims is offended if American lives are saved in the process? It is only our illogical - and stupid - concerns for promoting "diversity" at all costs that we find ourselves in the situation we are in. Afraid to question the radicalism of Muslims for fear of offending them. How idiotic. Yet, that is what the President wants. Appease our enemies - so what if American National Security is weakened!

ref - "I never said that you made those remarks. I made them."

I thought your post was self explanatory?

To answer your question, other than what Amy has already said . . . yes, what ever it takes. We do have a law that allows the government to monitor these situations, yes? Rather you agree with it or not, it has saved lives and kept this country safe until this Ft. Hood incident. Here's a case where even when there is law to prevent this very thing from happening, we have agencies that can't (or won't due to political correctness) see the writing on the wall. Regardless of what appears to be a huge lack of responsibility by those who gathered information about Hasan, he is a Muslim who was influenced by his Islamic beliefs to murder Americans. By ALL definitions, this is terrorism. Why some here want to place blame on other religions or defend this terrorist, baffles me.

If the CIA wants to set up outside my home or tap my phones for the intentions outlined in the statutes of The Patriot Act, go ahead, I have nothing to hide. If you want to spin this into something it isn't, it wouldn't surprise me, it seems to be the weapon of choice for the left.

Amy - "Funny you should bring up the Constitution."

Again, Amy is spot on! Where are the liberals who always bring up the constitution on just about every case and point. Were do they stand on this mandate to Obamacare?

As the "bill" is written, the law that is suppose to "fix" health care will actually financially destroy those who decline to participate with a $250,000 fine. In addition to the fine & imprisonment, enforcement of this bill could force some people to lose their home? So ultimately, some will have to trade their homes for Obamacare?

Unbelievable . . . were are all you constitutional advocates?

Amy: Actually Cindy Sheehan camped out in Hyannis during Pres. Obama's vacation, protesting his continuation of the war. And, as was reported by ABC News, she has moved to Washington DC, and has been outside the White House, with a bullhorn, protesting the war. She is also on the ballot in CA, against Nancy Pelosi, in 2010. Her protest was not just against Bush, but is against the war.

Well, if you can justify the internment of Japanese Americans, I suppose you can just as easily justify the internment of Muslim Americans. In retrospect does anyone believe that was the right thing to do? The justification for denying Japanese Americans their rights was based on fear. And if fear can be used as justification for denying certain citizens of their rights, then no one is safe. The constitution is a fraudulent document if it can so easily be abused.

2cents: The constitution allows for legislators to enact new laws. If the bill passes congress and is signed by the president it becomes law, and is thereby constitutional. I know I'm not as brilliant as you, so perhaps you could explain what you mean by unconstitutional. And if there is a basis for your argument, why aren't the smart people on your side of the aisle advancing it?

jmark - If this does become law, it will be challenged under the 9th amendment in that you can't force somebody to buy something they don't need or use. The federal government does not have the power to regulate Americans simply because they are there. There are plenty on both sides who will challenge the legality of Obamacare. You can't challenge it until it exists, something that just may not happen anyway. I think we'll just leave this to those smarter than both of us.

So do you agree with the penalties in the bill? A $250,000 fine, 5 years in prison and forfeiting your home to enforce Obamacare?

2Cents - " he is a Muslim who was influenced by his Islamic beliefs to murder Americans. By ALL definitions, this is terrorism. "

I agree with this. A person who groups who's kills for ideological reason uses terror of death to accomplish their goals.

Then by your definition Scott Schroeder who murdered Doctor Killer is a terrorist.

Jim Adkison who murdered all the people in a the "liberal" Chruch is a terrorist.

The man who gunned down the 3 cops in pittsburgh who was afraid Obama was going to take his guns, was a terrorist.

Jake - yes, yes and yes.

So your point is what? . . . these three people can somehow be tied to some right-wing organization? That if you are on the right you are a terrorist? Nonsense!

Is this suppose to somehow intimidate the right by insinuating the right is involved in the actions of these murderers. Haven't you and I already had a debate about the death and destruction caused by the left-wing organizations too? None of it is justifiable.

Murder is murder, no matter who commits it. Rather it's a baby or a doctor, Muslim or Christian, who ever flips the switch on the innocent is a murderer.

This blog is about the crime committed by Major Nidal Malik Hasan and the war on terrorism. It also asks the question if Obama is a hypocrite . . . . If you wish to defend Hasan then I suggest you go to Texas and support his defense team, maybe that will pacify your needs on that front.

Of the two or three comments by the left members, all have commented Obama, at the least, misspoke. I, like Amy (and I am sure some others) think Obama is a hypocrite.

So to you Jake, and the others who persistently try to spin this terrorist subject, I ask you this.

Is the "world-wide" problem with terrorism a Muslim Extremist problem or these "lone wolf" individuals influenced by rogue ideologies?

What single extremist group has terrorized every continent on planet earth? What other group has established itself in most every country in the world? What other extremist group has a pool of 1.4 billion members to recruit from?

Should we be concerned about the home-grown terrorists, of coarse. Not all Muslims are terrorist, but the Radical Muslim population is undeniably the biggest terrorist threat to mankind.

Jacob Pickard: You stated "please answer this question an I will leave you alone" in an earlier comment, way back. I answered your question, yet you have once again returned to this blog site with more silly remarks trying to equate terrorists with people who kill abortion doctors . Hmmmm. Not living up to your word, just like a liberal Dem, I see!

hemmer: It seems apparent he is leaving you alone. He hasn't asked any questions of you since you answered his question. If he wants to ask 2cents a question, who are you to object? Why are you acting like a whiny middle-schooler?

jmark: Now you have to step in to defend Jacob Pickard? In that case, why don't you defend the poor sap against verbal abuse from Papa Muskie? It seems he frightened poor Jacob with a verbal threat. Pickard asked me to do something about it - what I cannot imagine? Does Pickard notice there is a "Report Abuse" section for reporting offensive comments? (You should be aware of that, jmark, since several of your sick sexually perverse comments have gotten the boot once I've reported them!)....