Obama is officially an embarrassment on the world stage

Nobody wins, because your assumption is that a military confrontation with Russia would stop at conventional warfare. Are you willing to take the risk that nuclear weapons might be involved? Nobody wins a damned thing in a nuclear exchange.

 

You misunderstood me, I have no assumption that it would remain a conventional war. The second Russia started losing territory they would fire their arsenal and we would reply in a major way, and yes no one would win. I believe it was Einstein that when asked what weapons men would fight with in the next possible world war he stated he did not know, but that he knew that the weapons unsed in WWIV would be sticks and stones. The thing is if Russia descides to start the next World War due to Putins expansion dreams and they do end up using nukes we will have zero choice to fire back, that is what has kept the world from from daning with the idea and only works so long as all the players know they cannot win, the second one changes their mind we ALL lose. I am against using the military at this point, but if he continues down this path then we will unfortuantely have to confront them with the use of force.

 

you mean corrupt men and that started with Ronald Reagan.all serving wall street instead of the american people.

 

Sorry for the late response...

Well, I suppose we'll have to go one by one then. For one, some of these laws don't just come right out and say they are restrictions of freedoms, but are often slipped into either new legislation or inserted into existing legislation.

Is the right to protest a civil right? Yes. Is it being banned completely. No. However, if the government can say where you can and cannot protest, in some much as to mitigate the effectiveness of your protest, is that restricting human rights. I suppose that will be the question when debating this...

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2012/03/the_anti_protest_bill_signed_by_barack_obama_is_a_quiet_attack_on_free_speech_.html

Rather than just list a bunch of things obnoxioulsy, it's probably better to talk about them one at a time, so there's the first one. Is that a restriction, or fair game?

Also, note that the government routinely redefines past and present legislation in order to extend jurisdiction or to authorize certain actions, such as the phone-tapping case involving a woman and a phone-stalker decades ago (can't remember the name) is used to justify the massive information gathering going on today. So to say that the power is there but they will never use it is not a good argument.

 

The right to disagree with the governments actions is our right, that is why you will never hear me say one side or the other should not have that right, it is one of our fundimental rights as free men.
The government can and does violate the rules and that is why We the People need to hold our elected officials responsible for their actions and Party should not play a part in who we hold accountable.
Any questions, so far?

 

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303933404577500810740985338
President Barack Obama called Wall Street executives "fat cats,'' criticized their bonuses and tried to raise their taxes. The financial-services industry, in turn, has directed a stream of complaints toward the administration, fueling perceptions of a rift between the president and a key 2008 donor group.

President Barack Obama called Wall Street executives "fat cats.'' But, defying expectations, the securities and investment industry has remained an important part of the Obama fundraising effort. Peter Nicholas has details on The News Hub. Photo: Reuters.

But, defying expectations, the securities and investment industry has remained an important part of the Obama fundraising effort. Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee raised more than $14 million from the securities and investment industry through the end of April, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. Mr. Obama's campaign alone raised $361,000 from the industry in May.

 

At this point, Obama would probably greatly prefer to ignore Europe altogether and focus instead on something he knows about -- COLLEGE BASKETBALL! When he pretends to act like he has the merest idea of the overall European situation, he is WAY out of his depth (not for the first time). He would be well-advised to leave Vladimir Putin alone. The man is ten times smarter than Obama is, and could really **** things up for us in the Middle East, and through his buddies in China, also in East Asia and the Pacific. Look for new "troubles" to start brewing up any day. And what will President Warlord do then? Draw another "red line"...? Maybe he'll go bellyache to the UN again (they all think he's a pathetic moron, too, but they're happy to take all the money he's willing to give them)....

 

Putin is 15 steps ahead of Obama in another league.

 

When did that happen? If you have a crystal ball give tomorrow's lotto numbers, I MEAN really...

No fears of WWIII, Obama is a coward, he'll back down long before the Russians even punch in the first digit of the launch codes...

 

Has the recent government, under the Obama administration, restricted the rights of the citizens?

 

Not really true. If one person fires off nuclear rounds that cannot be stopped, then the US is pretty much screwed anyway. The only reason you fire your nukes in retaliation is to make the point that if I go down, you go down with me. While that seems manly, it's absurd and shows that one nation cares just as little about the world around them as the other. However, with great power comes great ego's and simply taking a blow for the rest of the world will never factor in. Mutual annihilation, by design, is a policy based on the respective selfishness of all nations involved.