The government can kill you but can't make you buy insurance?

Well I'm skeptical of the disgusting nihilism and cyncism and constant conspiracy theorizing taking place in our society that prevents what are normally rational people from accepting facts and (*)(*)(*)(*)ing up our political discourse to the point that we have radical conspiracy theorists on both sides of the aisle calling the shots in the parties while the mainstream moderates among us have to constantly fight with both camps just to keep a little sanity in the debate.

I'm sick of hearing all these million and one little contradictory theories. The Governmen cannot be socialist/communist/liberal in nature and at the same time be a conservative warmongering slave to wall street. It's impossible they are all contradictory!

At any one time during a 24 hour news cycle the Government is basically a giant mythical boogie man responsible for every social ill imaginable upon mankind or alternatively it's our best friend who wants to look out for us, or it magically morphs into a wall street dominated corporate tool and then after that it suddenly becomes a warmongering leviathan that wants to conquer the world. It can't be all things to every one.

 

They tax you. They don't come out guns blazing. This isn't Rambo.

 

Mmhmm. And if you don't pay? It all boils down to guns in the end.

 

Do you not see the obvious problem with comparing criminal law to healthcare policy?

 

Maybe a little "live and let live" might be a prescription. Such things as honoring "individual liberty" instead of everyone trying to make everyone else to think like they do. I agree with you, I am sick of it too. But, to me, the gov is the biggest manipulator of these times and, as the founders of our country knew, it is the gov that we must beware of. Thus the second amendment.

 

Obama killed Anwar al-Awlaki without even being convicted of any crime and without due process.

 

I'm guessing this isn't popular amongst those who wanted civilian trials for gitmo detainees... or those who thought Obama would close gitmo.

 

While I am against Obama Care, you will be paying for me.....thanks!

 

I'm glad he did, but where are the libs on this killing the guy without even being convicted of any crime and without due process?

 

Comparing losing your life based on due processes to making someone buy something they don't want...without due process.

Is this the type of reasoning I can look forward to when I start watching network news?

 

I see liberals still don't understand the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

 

A liberal president authorized it though, so it has to be wrong.

 

Well, it's complicated.

You see, we can't trust the government with our healthcare or education, but we can trust it with blowing up Muslims.

 

I trust my Government to deal with foreign policy issues in a way that leave Americans better off than the other guy. Foreign relations are not about friends and hugs and kisses and rainbows. They are about manhandling, cajolling or threatening the other guy into doing what is in your nation's best interests which may not be in the other guys nation's best interest.

As far as I'm concerned when it comes to Foreign Policy, if the US needs to be a dictator or an assassin or whatever else it needs to do to maintain American economic and military dominance then so be it. As long as it doesn't do that (*)(*)(*)(*) on American Soil I could give a (*)(*)(*)(*) less what happens outside the borders.

I am an American first, not a citizen of the world and I see the "rest of the world" as competitors to be eliminated, stepped over or crushed, not people to be coddled and kissed up to or apologized to. Hegemons don't apologize, they retaliate.

 

The key phrase, of course, being "if convicted". I refer you to the 5th Amdt.

and the 14th Amdt

 

Yes, but the total loss of rights (i.e. killing) can only occur because of a crime, and the criminal gets due process in the matter. Just shows that Colbert is a comedian (not a pundit or legal scholar) who doesn't understand the Constitution.

 

What if the Criminal is beyond the reach of the Constitution? What if capturing and trying the criminal in a Court of Law just to put some bull (*)(*)(*)(*) rubber stamp on an already forgone conclusion is ludicrous.

The "trial" of Alawki would be a farce, a kangaroo court and do even more damage to America. Killing Alawki was clean, convenient for America and the right thing to do. To try the man would've been nothing but a rubber stamp anyway and would've meant nothing at all and was a foregone conclusion.

This is why we can't really try KSM. To try him would be a farce because we can never let him go even if he's found innocent. The American people would freak out. So no.. this was the best way to end the problem of Al Alawki and no one is mourning his passing except crazy libertarian fundamentalists and other whackjob followers who to my moderate mind are beginning to sound more and more like the kind of people who would agree with a "Tim McVeigh" ideology.

 

Yes weeding out people who are a danger to society is necessary and those people should be eliminated, but I don't believe anybody should get the death penalty on circumstantial evidence.
　
　
And absolutely not, should the government demand mandatory you must buy this item for each and every citizen, especially if there will be exemptions to the rule. It sets a bad precedence and talk about a slippery slope, what is next? Everybody must purchase deodorant? Everybody must purchase spinach? Everybody must purchase this brand of peanut butter??? It's called tyranny.

 

It's only a gray area to apologists of the illegal activities of this and the previous administration. The "war on terror" is only a war because George Bush manipulated the fears of a nation and fed an panicked atmosphere of revenge.

There is no war in the legal sense. Therefore there is no legal justification for the assassination of anyone. The supporters of this action continue to claim he was a terrorist. Where is the proof? Had he even been charged? Had an indictment been handed down?

If Owebama can do this then I can claim you are a murderer and someone can bomb you.

There is either a rule of law, or there is lawlessness. You can't suck and blow at the same time.

 

These people are at war with anyone who doesn't have their beliefs, no matter what we say or do, so the only way to fight such violence is with violence. This is exactly the way to eliminate them, and what we should have been doing from the very beginning. One hit at a time until they either blow themselves up, do the honorable thing and commit suicide, or succumb to the fear that they could be the next target. You don’t fight a bully by being fair, or considerate of their feelings.
　
Of course I can see how the political mentality would see this as carte blanche to push their own twisted agenda. Exactly why the two party system shouldn’t have any power.