Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Oval Office Address...... (OK - I will ask)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • The Oval Office Address...... (OK - I will ask)

    So I watched our President last night and I am curious what people's thoughts about his speech are.

    My take:
    He seemed to acknowledge that their may be a radical Islamic group in action here. Though he danced around it a bit, seeming to minimize the size of the group that are radicals. I was happy to hear him call to the moderate and liberal Muslim populace, telling them that they need to more publicly decry the atrocities, and that the radical principals are not in alignment with the ideals of an open civilization.

    I was disappointed with the call to gun control - specifically the no-fly list part. Anyone can be placed on the no-fly list, even by clerical mistake, or having a name similar to someone on the list. Tougher gun control does not equate to less guns - just as the drug war did not eliminate the proliferation of heroin, crack, or meth availability.

    One thing that has always impressed me about him is his ability to speak to the public.

    Anyway, I am curious what others thought and since no one started it - well I thought I would kick it off.
    It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must stop it.
    Bill Clinton 1995, State of the Union Address


    "When they go low - we go High" great motto - too bad it was a sack of bullshit. DNC election mantra

  • #2
    The president was on TV last night? Hmm.
    "I lingered round them, under that benign sky: watched the moths fluttering among the heath and harebells, listened to the soft wind breathing through the grass, and wondered how any one could ever imagine unquiet slumbers for the sleepers in that quiet earth."

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by baldgriff View Post
      So I watched our President last night and I am curious what people's thoughts about his speech are.

      My take:
      He seemed to acknowledge that their may be a radical Islamic group in action here. Though he danced around it a bit, seeming to minimize the size of the group that are radicals. I was happy to hear him call to the moderate and liberal Muslim populace, telling them that they need to more publicly decry the atrocities, and that the radical principals are not in alignment with the ideals of an open civilization.

      I was disappointed with the call to gun control - specifically the no-fly list part. Anyone can be placed on the no-fly list, even by clerical mistake, or having a name similar to someone on the list. Tougher gun control does not equate to less guns - just as the drug war did not eliminate the proliferation of heroin, crack, or meth availability.

      One thing that has always impressed me about him is his ability to speak to the public.

      Anyway, I am curious what others thought and since no one started it - well I thought I would kick it off.
      Tougher Gun control absolutely leads to few deaths by guns. Hell just bringing every state up to code with California would be a start.
      If I whisper my wicked marching orders into the ether with no regard to where or how they may bear fruit, I am blameless should a broken spirit carry those orders out upon the innocent, for it was not my hand that took the action merely my lips which let slip their darkest wish. ~Daniel Devereaux 2011

      Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
      Martin Luther King, Jr.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by baldgriff View Post
        So I watched our President last night and I am curious what people's thoughts about his speech are.

        My take:
        He seemed to acknowledge that their may be a radical Islamic group in action here. Though he danced around it a bit, seeming to minimize the size of the group that are radicals. I was happy to hear him call to the moderate and liberal Muslim populace, telling them that they need to more publicly decry the atrocities, and that the radical principals are not in alignment with the ideals of an open civilization.

        I was disappointed with the call to gun control - specifically the no-fly list part. Anyone can be placed on the no-fly list, even by clerical mistake, or having a name similar to someone on the list. Tougher gun control does not equate to less guns - just as the drug war did not eliminate the proliferation of heroin, crack, or meth availability.

        One thing that has always impressed me about him is his ability to speak to the public.

        Anyway, I am curious what others thought and since no one started it - well I thought I would kick it off.
        I'm curious how big a group do you think the "radicals" are ? I'm also curious what the significance of moderate and liberal Muslims decrying the violence is, maybe you could explain that. What it seems like to me is there is one event with two people (that we know of, don't think I have seen any evidence of others being involved) and this is perhaps being blown out of proportion.

        As far as President Obama's talk, I didn't see it, but I believe he said we would defeat ISIS. I'm not sure we have a good plan for that. Additionally, destroying ISIS wouldn't neccesarily prevent events like this one. How do you prevent people from thinking and doing what these people did ?
        ---------------------------------------------
        Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
        ---------------------------------------------
        The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
        George Orwell, 1984

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by The Feral Slasher View Post
          I'm curious how big a group do you think the "radicals" are ? I'm also curious what the significance of moderate and liberal Muslims decrying the violence is, maybe you could explain that. What it seems like to me is there is one event with two people (that we know of, don't think I have seen any evidence of others being involved) and this is perhaps being blown out of proportion.

          As far as President Obama's talk, I didn't see it, but I believe he said we would defeat ISIS. I'm not sure we have a good plan for that. Additionally, destroying ISIS wouldn't neccesarily prevent events like this one. How do you prevent people from thinking and doing what these people did ?
          More fucking guns! Aren't you paying attention??
          "I lingered round them, under that benign sky: watched the moths fluttering among the heath and harebells, listened to the soft wind breathing through the grass, and wondered how any one could ever imagine unquiet slumbers for the sleepers in that quiet earth."

          Comment


          • #6
            Did I ever say more guns was the answer??
            It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must stop it.
            Bill Clinton 1995, State of the Union Address


            "When they go low - we go High" great motto - too bad it was a sack of bullshit. DNC election mantra

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by The Feral Slasher View Post
              As far as President Obama's talk, I didn't see it, but I believe he said we would defeat ISIS. I'm not sure we have a good plan for that.
              Additionally, destroying ISIS wouldn't neccesarily prevent events like this one. How do you prevent people from thinking and doing what these people did ?
              I listened on the radio and was waiting for him to just say "As far as stopping events like this, we can't," because I think that's the truth. Of course he couldn't say that though.

              I thought it was a decent address.

              The no fly list stops you from flying on a plane. I figure if they have enough cause to keep you from traveling to grandmas, they probably have enough cause to keep you from purchasing a gun. It's not like it's the death penalty and we are worried we are killing a few innocents. There's recourse here if you are mistakenly on the no fly list and are denied a gun.
              I'm not expecting to grow flowers in the desert...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by baldgriff View Post
                Did I ever say more guns was the answer??
                I have no idea.

                I was just Fucking around.
                "I lingered round them, under that benign sky: watched the moths fluttering among the heath and harebells, listened to the soft wind breathing through the grass, and wondered how any one could ever imagine unquiet slumbers for the sleepers in that quiet earth."

                Comment


                • #9
                  See this article from Huffington. The process and how you are determined to be placed on the No-Fly list is fairly subjective. While Im not trying to tin-hat here, I dont want to see some backdoor policy that places people on a no-fly list in order to limit their ability to possess guns.

                  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5617599.html

                  or more recently:

                  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-h...b_8714460.html
                  It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must stop it.
                  Bill Clinton 1995, State of the Union Address


                  "When they go low - we go High" great motto - too bad it was a sack of bullshit. DNC election mantra

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Ohh -- Got it.
                    It is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years and we must stop it.
                    Bill Clinton 1995, State of the Union Address


                    "When they go low - we go High" great motto - too bad it was a sack of bullshit. DNC election mantra

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by baldgriff View Post
                      See this article from Huffington. The process and how you are determined to be placed on the No-Fly list is fairly subjective. While Im not trying to tin-hat here, I dont want to see some backdoor policy that places people on a no-fly list in order to limit their ability to possess guns.

                      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_5617599.html

                      or more recently:

                      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-h...b_8714460.html
                      Reading that, people in the no fly list certainly shouldn't be deprived of the ability to fly
                      I'm not expecting to grow flowers in the desert...

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        well, the difference is that gun ownership is (sigh) a constitutional right, and flying isn't, so we can have lower standards for how well we maintain a no-fly list than a no-gun list. at least that's how I understand it.
                        In the best of times, our days are numbered, anyway. And it would be a crime against Nature for any generation to take the world crisis so solemnly that it put off enjoying those things for which we were presumably designed in the first place, and which the gravest statesmen and the hoarsest politicians hope to make available to all men in the end: I mean the opportunity to do good work, to fall in love, to enjoy friends, to sit under trees, to read, to hit a ball and bounce the baby.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          IANAL, but... on the vehicle of your choosing? If they're being stopped from getting on a plane but they can still drive or take a train or whatever, is that still a constitutional violation?
                          In the best of times, our days are numbered, anyway. And it would be a crime against Nature for any generation to take the world crisis so solemnly that it put off enjoying those things for which we were presumably designed in the first place, and which the gravest statesmen and the hoarsest politicians hope to make available to all men in the end: I mean the opportunity to do good work, to fall in love, to enjoy friends, to sit under trees, to read, to hit a ball and bounce the baby.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by baldgriff View Post
                            So I watched our President last night and I am curious what people's thoughts about his speech are.

                            My take:
                            He seemed to acknowledge that their may be a radical Islamic group in action here. Though he danced around it a bit, seeming to minimize the size of the group that are radicals. I was happy to hear him call to the moderate and liberal Muslim populace, telling them that they need to more publicly decry the atrocities, and that the radical principals are not in alignment with the ideals of an open civilization.
                            This article discusses several of the items you mentioned in your earlier post


                            Indeed, as we’ve previously point out, Muslim leaders have been speaking out against Islamic terrorism for years … but we never hear about it from the mainstream American media.

                            Father Elias Mallon of the Catholic Near East Welfare Association remarks:


                            “Why aren’t Muslims speaking out against these atrocities?” The answer is: Muslims have been speaking out in the strongest terms, condemning the crimes against humanity committed by [extremists] in the name of Islam.

                            And Rabbi Marc Schneier notes in the Washington Post that the moderate Muslim majority is speaking out against the extremists … but “we’re just not listening.”

                            Sadly, the U.S. and West are backing the two main countries that support ISIS and Islamic terrorism: Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
                            ---------------------------------------------
                            Champagne for breakfast and a Sherman in my hand !
                            ---------------------------------------------
                            The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.
                            George Orwell, 1984

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The Oval Office address is 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington, D.C.

                              [/steve]
                              "Jesus said to them, 'Truly I tell you, the tax collectors and the prostitutes are going into the kingdom of God ahead of you.'"

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X