"The same person who attacked my home has gotten re-elected. Since yesterday, the pressure on my brain has increased. I remember all of the pain again."
Mohammad Rehman Khan, a 28-year-old Pakistani whose father, three brothers, and nephew were all killed in a U.S. drone aircraft attack a month after Obama first took office. His statement was reported by Reuters in a piece titled, “Obama victory infuriates Pakistani drone victims”:
In his re-election campaign, Obama gave no indication he would halt or alter the drone program, which he embraced in his first term to kill al Qaeda and Taliban militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan without risking American lives.
Drone strikes are highly unpopular among many Pakistanis, who consider them a violation of sovereignty that cause unacceptable civilian casualties.
This isn’t an election, it’s a prayer …
It doesn’t matter who wins because they’ve already lost. U.S. debt is over 100% of GDP, and neither candidate has the political will to put an end to this foolishness. To put that into perspective, national debt that exceeds 90% of GDP has historically been an economic death sentence. Debt doesn’t care about health care, national defense, women’s rights, party affiliation, or good intentions. It has crushed many great nations underfoot as ruthlessly as an invading army. Tonight’s winner will attempt to perform economic necromancy, but eventually the bubble will pop, the guys in charge will blame everyone but themselves, and a transition to a hard-money currency will likely begin. In spite of this, I see many great opportunities ahead.
Here’s to the decline! May it leave fertile soil!
"[W]hat’s not up for debate in this election is the continuation of the post-911 security state Bush instituted and Obama expanded. No matter who wins tomorrow, that state aparatus will continue to roll right along, because no-one in the corriders of power – industrialists, mainstream media or politicians – has any good short-term reason to do otherwise. The only losers are we the mooks, at home and abroad, who lose lives and liberty."
I have traveled this world much more extensively than either Obama or Romney, and I still do. I find everywhere, even in areas of conflict and economic difficulty, the vast majority of people are friendly, even kind, and have very similar aspirations, across cultures, to personal development and emotional [fulfillment].
The striking thing about [the] US Presidential “foreign policy” debate, is when it did occasionally discuss foreign policy, the world out there was discussed not as a place of vast potential, but as a deeply disturbing place full of foreigners who are, apparently, all evil except the Israelis, who are perfect. …
The correct attitude to all these foreigners that God so unfortunately and inexplicably placed on this planet, is apparently to maintain incredibly large armed forces, murder people with drones (they were both very enthusiastic on this one), place sanctions on them and declare them “currency manipulators”. The only surprising note was that both agreed that they could not kill everyone in Iran.
But “We can’t just kill our way out of this mess” was spoken with regret, rather than as an affirmation of the possibilities of cooperation instead. What a grim and joyless world view."
When you vote next month, you better think of that child laughing on the right.
Who is this? This is Abdulrahman al-Awlaki. An innocent 16-year old American teenager brutally assassinated by one of Barack Obama’s drone strikes.
Wait, you do not know who he is? How the fuck do you not know? It was all over the news! I bet you know about Big Bird and Binders Full of Women, though.
I mean, it is not like it was a story on:
1. Esquire: http://www.esquire.com/features/obama-lethal-presidency-0812-4
2. TIME: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2097899,00.html
3. NPR: http://www.npr.org/2012/08/26/160077178/obamas-warfare-from-power-to-a-policy
4. Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-airstrike-that-killed-american-teen-in-yemen-raises-legal-ethical-questions/2011/10/20/gIQAdvUY7L_story.html
5. ABC News: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/awlaki-family-protests-us-killing-anwar-awlakis-teen/story?id=14765076#.UIQyQJJEpjA
Oh wait. It looks like it was a story on these sites.
Your ignorance is unacceptable.
However, if you knew about this and yet decided that this bit of information is too damaging to your guy to warrant a mention, then your silence is criminal.
Your silence is criminal.
Just as some of us will never forget what happened to the young, innocent Abdulrahman, some of us will never forget your silent complicity
Obama criticizes Hilary’s healthcare “penalty” in 2008 mailer.
Just to remind everyone that both candidates have flip-flopped on health care, based on political efficacy.
When you cast your ballot, I just ask everyone to evaluate politicians by their actions, not their promises or their claims. Obama has flip-flopped on a multitude of issues, just as Romney has; Romney’s just not intelligent or eloquent enough to pull it off.
When you explain why you support who you support, don’t say that it’s because Romney isn’t just like Obama or because Obama wants to make college affordable or is good on civil liberties. Make sure your justifications are backed with actual policies signed off on. Political promises are just field-tested rhetoric designed to maximize their share of votes.
Yeah, this video will probably make you cry.
For the people who say that the President support gay marriage doesn’t accomplish anything…..
I totally see how this outweighs his crony capitalism, bailouts, drone campaigns, lying about closing Guantanamo Bay, signing of NDAA (and subsequent lawsuit to retain the indefinite detention portion), assassination of American citizens, extension of the Patriot Act, etc., etc., etc.
And it’s definitely not like Obama has said before that he supported gay marriage and then changed his mind. And then changed his mind again.
"Both candidates did a phenomenal job explaining why we shouldn’t support their opponent. It was made strikingly clear that neither candidate had any interest in answering any of the questions the American People were yearning to have answered, and instead wanted to disagree with each other about whose policies would be more disastrous. Romney said it best when he said, “We don’t have to settle,” because he’s absolutely right. We do not have to settle for either of these candidates. Gary Johnson wants to balance the budget now, stop the wars, and promote job creation. They have both convinced me without a doubt, that either of them would be a detriment to this country."
[…] Post fact checker Glenn Kessler decided to take Romney’s plan at face value. And he’s made an important discovery. It turns out Romney’s plan is an even more absurd exercise in flim-flam than we thought: The studies the Romney camp itself cites in defense of the plan don’t back up the plan’s promises.
Romney’s 12 million jobs promise is based on the idea that achieving energy independence will create three million jobs; tax reform will create seven million more; and that expanding trade and cracking down on China takes us to 12 million. But, incredibly, when Kessler asked the Romney campaign to back up these claims, this is what he got back:
We asked the Romney campaign and the answer turns out to be: totally different studies … with completely different timelines.
For instance, the claim that 7 million jobs would be created from Romney tax plan is a ten-year number, derived from a study written by John W. Diamond, a professor at Rice University.
This study at least assesses the claimed effect of specific Romney policies. The rest of the numbers are even more squishy.
For instance, the 3-million-job claim for Romney’s energy policies appears largely based on a Citigroup Global Markets study that did not even evaluate Romney’s policies. Instead, the report predicted 2.7 million to 3.6 million jobs would be created over the next eight years, largely because of trends and policies already adopted — including tougher fuel efficiency standards that Romney has criticized and suggested he would reverse.
There you have it. Ten million of those jobs in Romney’s plan represent an entirely bogus promise. As for the remaining two million jobs that would be supposedly created by Romney’s trade policies, the report supplied by the Romney camp bills itself as “highly conditional” — and also doesn’t evaluate any of Romney’s policies. Kessler dubs Romney’s plan “bait and switch.”
Let’s recap what Kessler has discovered here. The plan that is central to Romney’s candidacy on the most important issue of this election — jobs — is a complete sham. This is every bit as bad — or worse — than Romney’s claim to have created 100,000 jobs at Bain, or his vow to cut spending by eliminating whole agencies without saying which ones, or his refusal to say how he’ll pay for his tax cuts.
Global Warming Alert! No warming for 16 years
According to new data released last week, not only did “global warming” stop 16 years ago, but temperatures have been flat for about the same amount of time that they had initially rose prior to this period.
From the UK Daily Mail:
The world stopped getting warmer almost 16 years ago, according to new data released last week.
The figures, which have triggered debate among climate scientists, reveal that from the beginning of 1997 until August 2012, there was no discernible rise in aggregate global temperatures.
This means that the ‘plateau’ or ‘pause’ in global warming has now lasted for about the same time as the previous period when temperatures rose, 1980 to 1996. Before that, temperatures had been stable or declining for about 40 years.
The new data, compiled from more than 3,000 measuring points on land and sea, was issued quietly on the internet, without any media fanfare, and, until today, it has not been reported.
This stands in sharp contrast to the release of the previous figures six months ago, which went only to the end of 2010 – a very warm year.
Ending the data then means it is possible to show a slight warming trend since 1997, but 2011 and the first eight months of 2012 were much cooler, and thus this trend is erased.
I don’t expect that those who promote climate change hysteria that is now a part of the culture in much of America, to suddenly change their minds about it. But the fact is, the data just isn’t on their side. So the next time you hear a AGW believer complain that neither candidate is taking the issue of climate change seriously, just know that it’s because it doesn’t exist.