December 31
Rex Der Hause
Ministry of Truth
and you will stop. don't MAKE IT HAPPEN!!!!!!!!!! let it grow This the faith my Father taught me - and my Father in LAW taght my mate. So let it be written. So let it be done.... otherwise..... Hurry along you don't want to be LATE Butt.. Buttt.. I"M not going anywhere.... and NEITHER are YOU oh....sillyme, NO , not late in the sense of your silly temporal sytem which doesn't even allow me to show my true age.. Late as in the LATE MR DENT I men LATE in it's TRUE sence, you know DEAD..... Bit of THREAT actually come to think of it..... silly things to use to try to control a warrior priest, so I forget sometimes that it actually works on some Humans


Token's Links
FEBRUARY 6, 2013 8:25AM

Skeet Photo- Good Catch Bill Beck!

Rate: 6 Flag

Bill Beck

Good Catch!

 Skeeters- Obama's skeet photo


 Bill posted this link that explains the puff of smoke on the pres's shotgun barrel:

I figured someone out there would fill me in technically on this :

That ol Obama, his people sure know their business! ( Illusion)
Makes perfect sense. Sneak in a seldom seen type gun- red herring on "Skeeter"  instead of talking about Guantanomo, Bengahazi or Drone strikes.    ( worked real well with the computer generated"Certificate of Live Birth" didn't it?)

SOMEONE at camp david owns a pretty fancy skeet gun, and probably knows how to use it- A Secret Service guy maybe?

It explains the puff of smoke from where you don't see smoke ordinarily. I' been aware of Magna port since (?) 70s? - on handguns- never paid much attention to shotguns. Never seen a double with a choke tube in just one barrel- doesn't meen someone wouldn't do it like that- mostly aesthetic, it isn't strictly“pretty enough” for skeet shooters. - symettry demands none or two

Obama's custom gun - c'mon.

And of course, Obama would be shooting “Skeet”( Wuss-low powered) loads, so the recoil isn't what you'd get from a 2 1/2 in 12 ga duck load- so, holding it on the actual shoulder joint, it probably wouldn't actually dislocate the joint- ( seen it happen- seenit LET happen to some tenderfoot knowit all )

I don't doubt at all that the prez has busted a cap at a “skeet”
( Probably not many- even a light load will hurt your arm, thway he's holding it.

But see bill, that ain't the point
The point is it's just one of those picture that you look at and, if you have experience of the subject, you just feel the hairs come up and theirs something creepy and wrong about it- you can't quite put your finger on it- maybe like a farm scene painting which includes a cow getting up front legs first----

You just look at it and you say- thats.. so......Wrong--creepy
You just can't picture that the guy has ever done it very much-

Like the Dukakis in the Tank pic.  Here is a guy who CLEARLY has no idea what he's doing..

What you are trying to talk away, bill, ( and I hear you been around guns as a cop and a marine, sso you know this ) is that that is a damn fine pictur of a person shooting a gun, who should never be allowed around a gun- 

You DON”T want to be around this guy. he'll swing his barrel around and blow your head off.(PROBABLY accidently-)

And you want to trust him wth DRONES?

This is the Emily Litella strategy where if I point out the problem of “Sex and Violence on TV”, you set off on a rant about how you LIKE saxaphones and violins!- Nevermind.

I'm gonna enlarge on this tommorrow.
Gotta get up and stretch and lie down.

Meanwhile- some sax and violence:



needs more cowbell.

Your tags:


Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:


Type your comment below:
PS libby had the most thoughtful comment- which I hope she doesn't mind my reprinting- with my answer:
[r] Hah!!!! well done, rudy.

If it will keep him from droning then keep on with this hobby, Barack., but I suspect it has the opposite effect. Skeets and bug splats, no big difference.

Image with a gun good for one group and of course shooting for macho and patriarchy and power is important in cowboy America, not that humanist paradigm image of gentleness and kindness. So not cool, empathy.

Not shooting animals good for another group of citizens I suppose. Obama and his tightrope of pr.

Still, if we made fun of Bush with the flak jacket, I think Obama deserves some cynicism as well. Impression management!

Ratio of civilians to skeets? Horrifying.

from wikipedia

"The firearm of choice for this task is usually a high-quality, double-barreled over and under shotgun with 26- to 30-inch barrels and very open chokes. Often, shooters will choose an improved cylinder choke (one with a tighter pattern) or a skeet choke (one with a wider pattern), but this is a matter of preference. Some gun shops refer to this type of shotgun as a skeet gun. Alternatively a sporting gun or a trap gun is sometimes used. These have longer barrels (up to 34 inches) and tighter choke. Many shooters of American skeet and other national versions use semi-automatic and pump-action shotguns. The use of clay targets to simulate hunting scenarios is one reason the targets are called clay pigeons.

"The event is in part meant to simulate the action of bird hunting. The shooter shoots from seven positions on a semicircle with a radius of 21 yards (19 m), and an eighth position halfway between stations 1 and 7. There are two houses that hold devices known as "traps" that launch the targets, one at each corner of the semicircle. The traps launch the targets to a point 15 feet above ground and 18 feet outside of station 8. One trap launches targets from 10 feet above the ground ("high" house) and the other launches it from 3 feet above ground ("low" house).

At stations 1 and 2 the shooter shoots at single targets launched from "the high house and then the low house, then shoots a double where the two targets are launched simultaneously but shooting the high house target first. At stations 3, 4, and 5 the shooter shoots at single targets launched from the high house and then the low house. At stations 6 and 7 the shooter shoots at single targets launched from the high house and then the low house, then shoots a double, shooting the low house target first then the high house target. At station 8 the shooter shoots one high target and one low target."

best, libby


Thank you for explaining skeet to me. Seriously- I'd never really thought about it as something other than Wussy Thurston Howell III types playing at “Hunting”. Never actually knew the Rules. Watched em all my life at various shooting ranges, while I was shooting a Rifle. They are “Fun to Watch”.

We shot small game in season ( well, eatin season anyway) and Varmints ( woodchuck) anytime. We used to tease the kids whose fathers shot skeet or trap ( some of their kidsw did as well, but it wasn't something you talked about in the group I hung with- like being made to mind your younger brothers) , that if you couldn't hit what you wanted to hit with a rifle, you might as well give it up, you can't shoot. Shotguns are for impressing nocturnal visitors, or deer hunting with a slug or buckshot.

You are dead on about the rest of it. I'm one of those guys who don't kill things anymore if I can help it- but I still eat meat, hence I'm an “Engineer” I design/build/hire/elect killing machines of both animals AND men. Just don't get the fun out of it I once did.

On the one hand I can tear up worrying about the feral cats that come around, let alone the homeless kids my wife takes care off- on the other it's never good to takew a game too seriously- it's just one game in a long season.

Bill defended the President against the accusation of having fabricated a picture. That's a way, way different issue than looking like he doesn't know what he's doing. Like Lyndon Johnson putting Hubert Humphrey on a horse. Or, in terms of image consciousness, like Bush II landing in a fighter jet to say Mission Accomplished, when he was too connected during Vietnam to ever fly a jet outside the United States, which was way more macho posturing than I ever saw Obama do.

One is an accusation of looking silly and awkward. Fine, so do I half the time. The other is an accusation of a breach of ethics, of fabrication. You're acting like Bill's noticing the difference is unreasonable. No, it's not; your refusing to acknowledge the difference is unreasonable.

We know you don't like Obama but you're getting obsessive about it. You might have readers who would care that he fabricated a picture of himself shooting, which Bill apparently answered, but I can't imagine you have readers who care that he doesn't look comfortable shooting.

Yeah, you're a "warrior" and Obama is obviously a lawyer, actually a law professor. So what? Deal with it already.

I really couldn't care less how you feel about the President. I do, however, care when your animosity overrules your standards.

Knock it the Hell off.

You REALLY didn't "Get" the point of "photo shopping" Obama with a gun, into Dukakis with a Tank? You and I go back a ways, so I really don't mean this as an insult, but I thought YOU would- and people like Bill and PJ and TOm WOULDN't.

Maybe I should have photo shopped him into a picture of a Fish skiiing. - the SUBTLE point of the whole piece was it doesn't matter whether he's actually "shooting" a "skeet"- It's CLEARLY a PR thing, and just the way he's holding the gun shows he doesn't "Do Skeet" more than two or three time s like that before, even with light loads, he begins to develop a separated shoulder. That's just Physicxs.Any one who's been around shooters just LOOKS at that picture and busts out laughing. , cause he knows what that guys arm is going to feel like in the mornig.

Hence the opposite effect from that desired"(?) on shooters- JUST LIKE DUKAKIS MAKING A FOOL OF HIMSELF IN ATANK! ( except that arguably cost HIM the election)

The really fascinating part is that they may be doing it on purpose- Like with the birth certificate thing.

Just as you picked up immediately that in the “Meet the engineer” video thet “I should learn more chords”- I wasn't even aware of what “I “ was playing on the guitar, and I had to stop a second and think what a “Chord” was. I don't “Get” music. You don't “Get” shooting. BILL SHOULD
That's why don't suspect you of doing an Emily Littela, but I'm always wondering if BIll is.

Google Emily Littela Sax and Violins- youtube
PS- Don Rich's take was dead on
Blow "Knock it the Hell off" out your ass, Kosher! I know that you and Bill Beck have your noses up each others butts, but "your animosity" is overruling YOU common sense.

The PR picture of Obama shooting a shotgun to prove his manly manliness is bullshit as well. It's simply more of his "talking the talk with photo ops" while back stabbing behind closed doors.

Comparing it to Dukakus in a tank is legit. That you don't like it, or that it made BB whine and cry, just proves how close to home it hit. It's also legit to discuss Obama "playing wanna be shooter" and his remote control, by proxy murder of Americans via drone strikes.

Calling bullshit about ANYTHING Bill Beck says or does is redundant, btw.
Yes, somebody photoshopping Obama shooting a shotgun decided to fabricate a puff of smoke, and the way he's holding it is also evidence of poor photoshopping skills. It's a conspiracy to fool Americans that Obama shot a shotgun, the benefit for Obama's being, ya know...probably some connection to UN plots to impose Sharia law on 'merica.

Maybe some freind or acquaintance can convince you that you have a psycho-booger hanging from your nose.

Still jerkin off to roadkill?

Can you even READ? I just spent the whole post explaining that Bill Beck supplied the explanation for the puff of smoke and I have no doubt it is a "Non" photo shopped picture.

Which means it is dead certain that Obama holds a shotgun in such a way that would separate his shoulder if the gun he had had any kick to it. ( HAPPENS ALL THE TIME)

Hence- PR stunt. As Usual.

The point is NOT that I HATE "Obama", the point is that "Obama" is a Truman Show, a media creation, and the poor schmuck actually PLAYING him is just an Actor-- NOT an ACT er
The point is NOT that I HATE "Obama", the point is that "Obama" is a Truman Show, a media creation, and the poor schmuck actually PLAYING him is just an Actor-- NOT an ACT er

English words...that I grant...and in reasonable order.

But even in the paragraph where you assert "The point is NOT that I HATE "Obama"" pretty much reinforce the notion that the point IS EXACTLY THAT.

You hate Obama...which is your right in this free land where you can speak your mind; say what you will; and despise whomever in the government you desire. Just as you have the right to claim we have become a fascist country where freedom of speech is no longer tolerated.

But the rest of us can laugh at the notion...especially when you belie what assert using the very words you use to assert it.

You hate Obama...and that is the point, Rude.
^^ Apparently LOVES Obama (in a manly man, wannabe PR shotgun shooter kinda way) and is also WAY okay with war crimes, illegal incarceration and MURDERING 3 year old little girls with drones. ^^
"That ol Obama, his people sure know their business!"

Spoken like a true asshole--

His people? Ya mean niggers like Bill Beck don't you. Bill, who you can't even respect enough to capitalize his name. Fuck you rude. BTW- no such thing as a two and a half inch duck shell. Oh that's right, you're only concerned with handguns. Fuckwad..
Frank, AMY, Trig

To Clarify "His People" as in "My People will contact Your people"-
The people who created him and continue to write his scripts

Frank- the point is that there really isn't anyone there to hate- It's like "hating" Simon Legree - That's a ROLE, the guy playing him is just an actor


Ditto, girl

Be back to comment later- gotta fix the DVR now-

No such thing as a 2 1/2 inch duck shell? Shows just how much attention I pay to "Scatttergunners"- ( You ever watch the old John Wayne stuff where they always give the guy that can't shoot the 10 gauge coach gun? That I guess would be you. ) :-)

Get straight what the point is before using "Fuckwad", (or be one. :-)
No, Trig.

I don't respect bill beck worth a damn. The only one who has brought up his race, BTW (other than himself ALL THE FRICKIN TIME), is you. I dislike him because he is an insecure, malicious asshole. His race has nothing to do with it. It also doesn't excuse it.

Now where's your anger and comments about drone strikes against 3 y.o.'s? Or is that less important than sticking up for your manly man friends?
Did the administration photoshop the picture?

That Obama doesn't know what he's doing with a gun is no secret. You didn't need this picture to figure that out.

OK. Granted. Conceded. Embraced. He doesn't know what the Hell he's doing.

Now, tell me why I care.

Just what I need in a Chief Exective: the President isn't a Real Guy unless he knows his way around a gun.

Bill answered you because you made an issue of it. He didn't, you did.

My question is: Why do you think you're getting any traction with Skeetgate?

I have to tell you, I've seen the approach where you throw everything you can find at someone and hope something sticks. That's how we get crap like Birtherism. It leads to wasting a lot of time on bullshit, attempted distractions. It is not an approach with integrity. Distract with trivia. Welcome to Lawyerville, you're on your way to becoming a full-fledged member.

Who do you think pays attention to this? Oh My God, we thought the President was an OK guy but now we know he doesn't know how to hold a rifle properly, so Let's Impeach Him!

He posed for a picture for reasons of image! Uh, what does he do for a living again? Oh yeah, he's in Politics. Imagine That.

He was inept at it. Never seen that before either. Amazing!

Now, what is it that I don't get?
Some of us bring up our minorities a lot, for various reasons. I'm one of those. Being one of those, I would never have the nerve to complain about someone else doing so. I'm just sayin'.
Dude, are you drunk, on hard dope, or just illiterate?

Tell ya what... go back and capitalize your bills and fix the rest of this mess, or explain why not ok. Then I might make a better attempt to "get straight what your point is."

As far as "We shot small game in season ( well, eatin season anyway) and Varmints ( woodchuck) anytime. We used to tease the kids whose fathers shot skeet or trap ( some of their kidsw did as well, but it wasn't something you talked about in the group I hung with- like being made to mind your younger brothers) , that if you couldn't hit what you wanted to hit with a rifle, you might as well give it up, you can't shoot. Shotguns are for impressing nocturnal visitors, or deer hunting with a slug or buckshot."

I shot skeet . . . A LOT. It's called practice. Plus it's fun. Do you suppose you can hit one them there little clay flying disks with a rifle Jethro?

Amy.. Rude, your pal, is a racist. Truth be told he probably hates fags and carpet biters too. I'll take Bill Becks company over his anytime. As for drones and Obama, I find it inexcusable as I've said before. Capiche?
now we know he doesn't know how to hold a rifle properly, so Let's Impeach Him!

Nope. Let's impeach him for war crimes; for murder of American citizens; for torture; etc.

Kosher if you spent a 1/10th of the effort caring about the atrocities that Obama has committed that you do demonizing people who disagree with bill beck, passive-aggressively attacking anyone who isn't a "Neville Chamberlain" wannabe moderate "compromiser" or defending the right of Israel to commit genocide then you might have some credibility.

As it stands you don't.
Not wanting to get into the personal fray here but I did want to say something. Didn't Obama say "we" skeet shoot? Not sure about the rest of you folks but I've used "we" collectively" when I'm not always a main part of the "we" For instance, "we have a family reunion at our home once a year and "we" cook a huge pig. I don't know diddly squat about cooking a pig and I don't do the pig. But "we" still have a family reunion where "we" cook a pig. Photo-op..perhaps. Hell, I have pics of me near the rotisserie with the damn butt ugly pig on it. AND I'm sure someone would say that pig is just not hanging right on that spit. So in retrospect, does that mean I'm a liar, cheat, sneak and whatever else Obama's been called because I said "we" cook a pig? I'm guessing yes by the tone of some of these posts. I understand I'm not the POTUS nor will I be running in 2016 unless it's away from my home. But for goodness sakes, it's just a picture showing he's held a gun, which he probably has. If he sucks at it he sucks at it.

Have hit them with a ,22 single shot on many occasions, Thurston
I think Obama takes an extra step during a layout when playin' hoops and is NEVER called for travelin' ... what a travesty!

Funny to see the blog author and some commenters here get all lathered-up about crapola.

Carry on.

Also a .357 Ruger revolver
Frank- the point is that there really isn't anyone there to hate- It's like "hating" Simon Legree - That's a ROLE, the guy playing him is just an actor

The only reason you feel that, Rude, is because of your hatred of him. There IS someone there...a real person...a human being that you apparently are incapable of acknowledging because of your irrational and inflexible hatred of him.

But he is there whether you acknowledge it or not.

And as I said earlier, that is the point...that you hate the guy.
Didn't Obama say "we" skeet shoot? Not sure about the rest of you folks but I've used "we" collectively" when I'm not always a main part of the "we"...

How very Bill "The meaning of "is" is..." Clinton-ish of you to say that.! :D

To paraphrase one of Bill's buddies, allow me to say, "It's the drones/murders/torture, stupid!"
Ah so you HAVE shot skeet you homo!
" it wasn't something you talked about in the group I hung with-"

Ha.. whatever. I could give a shit less. It's a warm day. Going for a bike ride. Thanks to Obama's global warming weather machine it should be an early spring. I get bored stupid in the winter and spend way too much time reading the opinions of ignorant haters. Obama does hold a gun like a girl though... I'll grant you that, and of course if he wants to take an extra step in hoops... well, he IS president, duly elected by US... HAHA
Got any bowling pictures?
just stoppin in for a sec- got to runthe DVR box gto the cable store


I'm a Homo- ( per trig) me and Amy are waiting for the "banana Eating" pics. ( Homo Sapiens? )

Yep, he sure is- the other half of US who elected the House are just urging them to get up the balls to impeach his Treasonous ass- should be fun to watch.
I see. You're worried that someone might accidently get shot in the face or something? It's not about what appears to be an irrational hatred of Pres. Obama. Glad you cleared that up.

Not "worried" about him doing anything. Pointing out that he's creating a smoke screen so he doesn't have to discuss his umlawful killing of americaqn citizens ( and innocent children) by hellfire missle strike from predator drones.
It's almost too easy to point out that one of the loudest critics in this comment thread who accusing the President of having a fake (or photoshopped) gun, proudly boasts of her collection of strap-ons.

A strap-on is ... um ... er ... a fake, gun-like appendage, correct?

Got a photo of that?

(Too funny)
You seem to think this post is about drones. I'd respect it if it were about drones, but it isn't. It's about what I've started to call Skeetgate.

I don't know why I bother to explain things to you because you never read what I say anyway except to find phrases you think you can argue with but, being as I'm an idiot, I'll try once again:

I don't care who gets criticized, I care how and about what. I do not universally defend President Obama or Israel or even Bill Beck, though I tend to agree with Bill a lot more than I agree with the other two and I trust his integrity a lot more than I trust the integrity of the other two. If someone talks about drones, that's a sensible conversation. If someone talks about skeet, it isn't, because it's a complete sideshow. However, this post is about a sideshow. The argument that we should criticize Obama's skeet shooting because of drones is asinine.

I once wrote a post asking if Obama was a war criminal. You probably didn't catch that one. I didn't argue that he wasn't; I said I was undecided, tried to make both cases, and opened the floor. I did it for Markinjapan because after listening to him attack Obama about everything he could think of (there was no Skeetgate at the time), I finally started asking him what was Really pissing him off, got an answer, and presented the case. The post is still up. I'll get you a link if you're interested.

That, Amy, is a lot of why I do still have credibility. I don't do kneejerk. I don't have patience for kneejerk and that, more than anything else, is why we don't get along very well. I know if I see you in a room and certain words get said, I could win money betting on how you'll react.

Israel.................Palestinians (regardless of context), blockade
Holocaust..........Jews get too much attention, LGBT victims get
too little

Your responses might as well be preprogrammed. Kneejerk. Press a button. Beep. We don't even have to get to the cases. The words themselves will do.

Credibility? You aren't listening closely enough to establish any.
You think I'm here about Obama. I'm not. I'm here about obsessive attacks that have gotten way past the point where they make any sense.
Rude.. "oislandtime?" once again, drunk, doped, or ignorant? This is a venue that requires typing to communicate. A little effort man!

Sooo.. I just can't resist asking something, even knowing that I won't get an answer that makes sense: just what is it that your elected house of representatives (and you.. the ballsy lot of ya) think you are going to impeach Obama about?
Poor shotgunning posture?
Surely not "Benghazigate" lmao.
Oh wait, it's the drones, and killing US citizens thing?
How many US citizens died in Iraq pal, as direct result of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld and the rest of the neocon chickenhawks great idea to invade a sovereign country using the guise of 9/11 which they had nothing to do with, and the "weapons of mass destruction" thing? How many mother's sons (speaking of USA mothers here.. forget for now the dirty mooslims) died there, in an illegal war, for nothing.. pal? How many more are living with brain injuries and without limbs and dicks? No criminality there was there, since Bush was a good white Texan. Is that how it works?

Suck it up dude. I mean, if an impeached Obama (gay stance with the shotgun, half black, all that) is the fantasy that gets you through the night, fine, but it makes ya look even dumber than your typing does.
That point got lost amongst all your others, like his lack of manliness, attempting to photo shop up some manliness, and faking his birth certificate. It’s interesting to watch haters generate facts to support their hatred. I’ll leave you to it.
Tryin to fix a DVR- justskimming- I'll get back to you Kosher, you deserve a thoughtful answer


The impeachment would be for usurping the roles of the legislative and judicial branches in interpreting his authority under the constitution.

Specifically the arrogation of the authority to execute US citizens without due process ( NB_ Not as an ACT OF WAR - as a "Criminal Prosecution/Execution)

Other than that, there's the small matter of the Geneva convention.
We've agreed that there are certain rules of "civilized" warfare.
Assassination is specifically forbidden
"Targeted Killing" is only allowed in the case of "Imminent Harm"
We'll hash that out later

The point is that there are Rules for a reason.
"Lawyers" set them up so that "warriors" will not kill each other off
( They have a tendency to do that- and Lawyers find them both fun to watch and necessary to a Lawyer being able to survive among enemy warriors- Check out "Class" distinctions of Multi player shoot em up games)

The Geneva Convention specified "no Assassinations" for the obvious reason that Lawyers don't like to get shot. So they made killing them on purpose unlawful.

The "President of the United States" is NOT a "warrior"- he is the head legal executive of the federal government. A Lawyer.

When he starts targeting specific "Lawyers" in his Enemy camp, he sets a very bad precedent. He has no legal basis at all to complain if say, china(?) Iran(?) hacks the feed and gets control of a drone ( patrolling a presidential parade? and drops a hellfire missile on HIM. ( Hopefully getting Biden, too) . Or simply puts a sharpshooter somewhere-

That's why we have RULES

I grew up where there weren't many rules.
If you don't follow the rules you've agreed to, you don't have any kick coming when someone more lawless than you puts you out of the game permanently.

The one rule we did have, was Integrity
If you agree to rules, you play by them.
Bullshit is Bullshit
and brings back the simple rule of Revenge

I don't HATE Obama- I HATE the bullshit PR he is using to rule by FIAT with out consulting those who disagree with him.

I don't want to here this "Bush did it too" crap. Bush was an Idiot.

What they have in common is being run as puppets of cronies.

The Constitution is set up specifically to prevent that

Either follow the rules you swear to uphold, or suffer the consequences. Don't give me the "I'm a Shooter too! crap"
( As I said. Amy and I are waiting for the pics of the Prez that show he knows how to eat a banana- not that I have anything against banana eaters- just had too many waved in my face)

I CAN"T do the stuff I used to be able to do
I can't dance, I can't play football, I can't wrestle, I can't shoot
What I CAN do is insist you idiots play by the rules.
( Or I'll feel free to harass you in ways that you never dreamed of)


PS- Kosher, seriously, the post was about the drone strikes- and the camouflage of pulling an "Emily Littela"
lemme take care of a few of the comments while I'm here

Frank, PJ, Joisey, onislandtime :


The rest of you, I'll be back to try to give thoughtful comment when I get this &^^*(_++_)E#&%*I( ing DVR sorted out.

Seer has it right- it is all just "Magic"

Trig- about those 2 1/2 inch "duck Loads"
It did seem to me that the standard shot shell length for a 12 ga was 2 1/2 inches- though I've seen em from 1 " to 3'"
You sayin that if I load ( or buy) a 2 1/2 shell loaded with bb's I can't kill duck with em?

That's OK- if I wanted one to eat, I'd just shoot him in the head with a .22 while he's sitting- There's rules for "sportsmen" and then there's rules for them as is trying to stay fed. ( There's more geese around here now anyway- I'd just take a club to one at one of the shopping mall ponds-Course since I can barely walk out to the car anymore, the goose'd probably wind up eatin me. )
Yeah, lets drone on about drones. Perhaps just bombing the shit outta countries vaguely suspected of *something*, like y'all did with Iraq, is preferable to "surgical strikes" with the abominable drones. In the Iraq case, there are so many little children dead that we have no numbers and no names... The soil of Afghanistan is soaked with the blood of little children. Yet the terrorists threaten (I am taking the government word on this, and past events would support that position), and Something Must Be Done. Mass bombing? Nada? Try pinpoint assassinations w. drones?

Anyway, here for the moment and more or less focussing on a topic, the president puts forward a few widdle suggestions for cutting down on the TOTALLY INSANE GUN CARNAGE within your borders and there is an uproar, how he don't know nothin' about guns, so he mentions he skeet-shoots, and there's an uproar about he is surely lying and so he releases a photo to show he's not lying ("and here's my birth certificate again") and there's an uproar and...If he uses the uproars to deflect attention from other things, good on him, but he hardly has to try because all his opponents are busy doing that anyway.

One thing I don't quite understand is how Obama gets excoriated for his policies (TYRANT! SOCIALIST DICTATOR!) on the one hand and dismissed as a puppet of the Hidden Cabal on the other.
"There's rules for (civilized people) and then there's rules for them as is trying to stay (alive)."

Well put on how most Americans don't give a rat's ass about drones killing offshore targets and their not-so-collateral-teenage-human-shields.

Come back and drone-on (pun intended) when the eyes-in-the-skies start pickin'-off Americans on U.S. soil**. That's when most of us will start to give a shit. Until then, naaaa ... don't care.

**Bets are off when someone is in the middle of a violent crime and a drone can stop 'em on U.S. soil. No different than a shop owner killing an armed robber which happened in Philly last night. Good.

If you can't keep up, take notes
Precisely the specific impeachable offense is that he is unlawfully ( posse comitatus) using military force under cover of "Law Enforcement " - or vice versa.

rules for one situation do not apply in the other
The president is the head CIVIL authority for the very reason that the military was seen as being NECESSARILY subservient to the law, BUT SEPARATE (NO STANDING ARMIES). By the constitution,the president may no more dictate specific military action than he can design a rocket to the moon.
@ Trig:

I don't know what you are trying to prove with the "homo" and "gay stance", but if its that you are a complete dumbass... we already knew that.
@Myriad, Well said! It makes no sense, because it is nonsense.
ps- the executive branches authority for ANY capital punishment of a US citizen is sketchy, at best. Murder is a STATE maatter, as are most capital crimes.
If you feel that the executive branches authority needs to be updated, there is a process for that- it's called legislation- cutting the people's representative's out of the process is also a "High Crime or misdemeanor"
just listening to fox- ACLU and judicial watch say drone program use "minimally" by Bush has been expanded to 3000 killed- also Al Awaki's 16 year old son, killed as collateral damge in drone strike, in a routine investigation of american citizen deaths overseas by the state department listds his cause of death as "Unknown" ( Heh, Heh- there just wasn't enough left to be able to tell what killed him)
Just so KS, OiT and Myriad can't ignore / keep making witty little statements about "droning on about drones" etc., ignoring MURDER and excusing WAR CRIMES, without at least SEEING the names of the CHILDREN who were MURDERED:

Name | Age | Gender

Noor Aziz | 8 | male

Noor Syed | 8 | male
Wajid Noor | 9 | male
Syed Wali Shah | 7 | male
Ayeesha | 3 | female
Qari Alamzeb | 14| male
Shoaib | 8 | male
Maezol Khan | 8 | female
Ilyas | 13 | male
Sohail | 7 | male
Asadullah | 9 | male
khalilullah | 9 | male
Noor Mohammad | 8 | male
Khalid | 12 | male
Saifullah | 9 | male
Mashooq Jan | 15 | male
Nawab | 17 | male
Sultanat Khan | 16 | male
Ziaur Rahman | 13 | male
Noor Mohammad | 15 | male
Qari Alamzeb | 14 | male
Shahbuddin | 15 | male
Mohammad Salim | 11 | male
Bakht Muneer | 14 | male
Numair | 14 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Jamshed Khan | 14 | male
Alam Nabi | 11 | male
Rahmatullah | 14 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Ameer Said | 15 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Salman | 12 | male
Baacha Rahman | 13 | male
Luqman | 12 | male
Jannatullah | 13 | male
Ismail | 12 | male
Darvesh | 13 | male
Shaukat | 14 | male
Najibullah | 13 | male
Hizbullah | 10 | male
Kitab Gul | 12 | male
Wilayat Khan | 11 | male
Shehzad Gul | 11 | male
Nimatullah | 14 | male
Talha | 8 | male
Afrah Ali Mohammed Nasser | 9 | female
Zayda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 7 | female
Hoda Ali Mohammed Nasser | 5 | female
Sheikha Ali Mohammed Nasser | 4 | female
Ibrahim Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 13 | male
Asmaa Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 9 | male
Salma Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | female
Fatima Abdullah Mokbel Salem Louqye | 3 | female
Khadije Ali Mokbel Louqye | 1 | female
Hanaa Ali Mokbel Louqye | 6 | female
Mohammed Ali Mokbel Salem Louqye | 4 | male
Jawass Mokbel Salem Louqye | 15 | female
Maryam Hussein Abdullah Awad | 2 | female
Shafiq Hussein Abdullah Awad | 1 | female
Sheikha Nasser Mahdi Ahmad Bouh | 3 | female
Maha Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 12 | male
Soumaya Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 9 | female
Shafika Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 4 | female
Shafiq Mohammed Saleh Mohammed | 2 | male
Mabrook Mouqbal Al Qadari | 13 | male
Daolah Nasser 10 years | 10 | female
AbedalGhani Mohammed Mabkhout | 12 | male

Please note that I removed all of the MURDERED CHILDREN who were over the age of 15, so that JS won't have anything else to use as an excuse.

NOW tell me again, how Obama is NOT a murdering war criminal???

Here is graph showing Iraqi civilian deaths by violence from 2003 - 2011. Note the sharp decrease from 2008 onward. I don't think it would be possible to post all the names of the 116,774 civilian documented violent deaths. There is information on the number of deaths from US led coilation forces deaths as well.

(wouldnt waznt to embarrass myself by mistyping your namew again)

More Cowbell!!!

we aren't talking about the deaths of civilians in time of war as collateral damage. We are discussin the deasth of innocents in what can only be presumed to be the presidents extra judicial murder of US citizens ( Conspiracy to commit murder?) until he proves he has the authority to do execute them- he doesn't.

Mastermind, Emily
and that almost 117,000 civilians died for Bush's & Obama's war for oil / political ambitions excuses the additional MURDER of even more children? REALLY???

BTW OiT, I once again note that you STEADFASTLY refuse to address Obama's war crimes and his MURDER of innocent children. THAT is telling as all hell. It also proves what an apoplectic apologist you are.

(wouldnt waznt to embarrass myself by mistyping your namew again)

More Cowbell!!!

we aren't talking about the deaths of civilians in time of war as collateral damage. We are discussin the deasth of innocents in what can only be presumed to be the presidents extra judicial murder of US citizens ( Conspiracy to commit murder?) until he proves he has the authority to do execute them- he doesn't.

Nevermind, Emily
(Well, since we're in copy-and-paste comments mode, a la SBA)

"Haven't seen the blog author or SBA admit or disagree that there are scenarios where children, innocent or otherwise, may be killed and that it's unpreventable. And these situations can't be framed as right or wrong." Feb. 1st 3:28 PM at "License to kill" blog

(I'll spare the half-dozen readers/commenters a re-pasting of 4 scenarios that I laid-out asking for SBA and this blog author to respond)

Cut and paaste works for me-

This from the comment stream at the other site I posted "License to kill:
Scenario -- murderous terrorist (with dozens/hundreds of "kills" to his credit, including innocent children) surrounds himself 24/7 with a human shield of teenage males whom he is also teaching terrorist ideology/tactics. An American drone pinpoints his location but some in the human ring-around-the-terrorist are killed.

Your reaction to this is ... ?
Thanks for stopping in and posing the question. The short answer to your question is: Not enough information.

Where is he? It really does make a great deal of difference in the constitutional, not to mention legal aspects of the authority to do this if the terrorist was in a nation or region where we have a declared war ( or even an area where the President has declared action under the war powers act- though that is a question on it's own ) or whether he is in, say, a secret lair in Cinderellas castle at Disney World.

It also makes a huge difference whether the terrorist is a US citizen or not

The point I'm making is not that known terrorists should not be killed, put me in a room with them and a pistol and I'll do it myself.

The point is that the end run our president is doing around HIS accountability and authority as president to take such action.

He has no authority in his capacity as chief Law enforcement officer to order the murder of a US citizen anywhere for any reason. and he certainly has no authority to write off any other casualties as "Collateral Damage"

He has no authority as the Commander in chief to conduct any Act of War using the military within the borders of the United States or it's territories whatsoever. ( Posse Comitatus), and for him to direct specific air strikes as he sees fit, he would need to be operating in an area designated and reported to congress as "War zone". Then, he may use his discretion within THAT authority to drop a missile on any target he desires and reap the political results of however many people of what nationality, combat status and age, etc, etc he manages to kill by that ACT OF WAR.

What he is NOT authorized or legally empowered by the congress or any powers of the constitution is to wear both hats at once and at the same time run a personally selected Hit List of Enemies under the guise of a LAW ENFORCEMENT " investigation" (Bin Laden, Benghazi, Guantanamo) using the Military as extra judicial assassins. He can't have it both ways. Either he is assassinating selected "Criminals" in n extrajudicial manner and ANY innocent bystanders may be considered to have been murdered, as well as the "Suspect", or he is nitpicking a decision about the attack on enemy combatants that can and is made all the time by Infantry Non Coms. PROVIDED it is CLEARLY in a DEFINED MILITARY action.

What he wants to do is have it both ways. He wants Benghazi and Guantanamo and the drone strikes to be Ongoing Criminal Investigations, so that he can deny MILITARY action, but he is using the MILITARY. The military is specifically prohibited from being used in "Law Enforcement"
I don't HATE Obama- I HATE the bullshit PR he is using to rule by FIAT with out consulting those who disagree with him.

There ya go again, Rude.

I gotta tell you that any reasonable analysis of your diatribes indicate that you DO HATE OBAMA.

And that is the driving force behind all this nonsense.

But it is fun to listen to you insist on your rationalizations.

Reminds me of a scorned lover spitting out, "It doesn't bother me!"

Both the "It doesn't bother me" and the "I don't hate Obama" sound so hollow, one would think speakers of that nonsense would know better.

Obviously, however, they don't.
Hey Frank- Where again did you get your degree in Psychology, again?
I got mine at the University of Cincinnati

i've spent about 30 years in psychological study of human behavior in order to imitate it in Artificial systems

My expert opinion is that you mistake your motivation for other peoples- Externalization as it were

Whose YOUR shrink, Frank?
Hey Frank- Where did you get your degree in Psychology, again?
I got mine at the University of Cincinnati

i've spent about 30 years in psychological study of human behavior in order to imitate it in Artificial systems

My expert opinion is that you mistake your motivation for other peoples- Externalization as it were

Whose YOUR shrink, Frank?
(lickin' my chops)

Oh please do explain your understanding of AI and what neural network software you've had a hand in developing, Herr.

And your copy-and-paste would have been better served by showing your very last comment in that other thread. I answered your "not enough information" cop-out at the other site.

But it really doesn't matter. I don't give a shit and I'd venture a guess (which I suppose I could buttress with a reputable opinion poll if I felt like putting-in the time to research it) that most Americans could care less about shady characters and their human-shield rings getting vaporized.

Hell, it's good for business too. Gotta replace those drones and they are mainly assembled and programmed in the U.S. Good for the economy.

Carry on.
Last comment, based on Herr's "not enough information" spin.

SBA, regarding those teenage males on the kill-list that you like to post everywhere. What were their attitudes, do you think, about women and/or gays in society?

I would venture a guess that those boys-to-men would be a lot less accepting/tolerant than the treatment (or no-big-deal attitude) that you and your daughters receive here in the U.S.

Yeah, we live in such an awful country. (drippin' sarcasm)
@SBA, No, I do not respond to you because when you post racist or just in-general bullshit you then delete anyone that comments on it, and accuse them of "bullying" you when you can't defend the indefensible. Then you follow them around spouting histronic idiocy. I told you before, I have no patience for it.
If we wanted to address issues, it could be done, but it's not being done here. You want to discuss whether Obama is a criminal, post about it and post about what you'd do about it. You wonder if there are moral issues that have some ambiguity to them? OK, how's this:

How do we handle human shields?

Someone launches a missile from the roof of a hospital. How does the target respond? I'm not trying to take the conversation to another conflict - in fact I'd rather not because it's a distraction - but I'm trying to examine a principle. If the target doesn't respond, then we've just established a new rule of combat:

If you launch missiles from hospitals, you can launch as many as you want in complete safety.

Now what?

We know kids have been getting killed in drone attacks. What do we know about how and why that is happening? Are they human shields? Are they being killed because of sloppiness?

Does anyone think there's a guy in a room trying to figure out how many children he can take out?

OK, so does this make Obama a war criminal?

Let's get analogous. Does it make John McCain a war criminal? He was a pilot. I don't remember if he was a bomber pilot or a fighter pilot, which is to say a guy who protected bombers while they dropped their loads in ways that killed way, way more civilians than the drones have, including way more children and in a way more indiscriminate fashion. He almost became our President.

So, let's say that the issue is that Obama is theoretically usurping privileges the Executive Branch doesn't have. Who's letting him do it? What does your Congressman have to say about that? What does your Senator have to say about that? Who have you asked?

I hate to say this, because I don't want this statement to apply to personal matters, artistic posts of any sort, etc., but in terms of political posts I will say it:

We already know how you Feel. You've been more than clear about that. Skeetgate doesn't enlighten us; Skeetgate just gives us the impression that you think we care more than we do. You don't, I don't know, like the cut of his jib. Fine. Got it. Not news. Not the fifteenth time. Next.
Hey Frank- Where did you get your degree in Psychology, again?
I got mine at the University of Cincinnati

i've spent about 30 years in psychological study of human behavior in order to imitate it in Artificial systems

My expert opinion is that you mistake your motivation for other peoples- Externalization as it were

Whose YOUR shrink, Frank?

Ummm...does this translate to "I don't hate Obama" or "It doesn't bother me?"

Or maybe even, "The check is in the mail."

If you actually have a degree in psychology (my graduate work actually was in psychology) ought be able to see the truth better than it appears you are, Rude.
Rudy, I am so sick of the Obama apologists as well as the my country right or wrong types. This is what I just posted to Gordon Osmond's blog FWIW!!!!


I take HUGE issue with this paragraph:

"Nevertheless, there is a distinction between killing enemies in the heat of war and how you treat those enemies once captured. That the U.S. is at war with Islamic terrorists is obvious despite liberal dissemblers attempting to becloud the issue. That said, the drone attacks are no different than allied troops storming Nazi barricades, guns ablaze, in World War II. Torture of those captured in war is another issue altogether.But torture and EITs are not the same. "

end of quote from you

The whole world should not be the chosen US battlefield of terrorism so that there can be drone assassinations, bombings, wherever we choose, us with this new handy dandy diabolical weaponry that will be replicated soon enough by other nations to misuse it against us but the future blowback does not seem to bother the war mongers whether Dem or Republican.

There is or used to be international law that the US respected far more than the Bush or even worse Obama administration. There is the War Powers Act in which an executive has to consult Congress and be authorized before declaring War that Obama has violated.

There is crossing the boundaries of foreign nations we are not at war with like Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen with drone strikes. Obama is setting up drone bases all over the world. Particularly now for usage in Africa.

The War on Terror is a sham. It is for imperialism. For hegemony. Our CIA treats al-Qaeda terrorists in one country like the enemy (Iraq and Afghanistan) but in Libya and Syria because the US wanted regime changes there they are our allies and we lie and pretend they are home-grown rebels there when they are not, they are foreign jihadists who moved in.

We enable them with our supplies and money. This is "ends justifies the means" thinking though our government LIES about it. And our government is not fighting terrorism (it hurts to say that since our government is really the main provocative world terrorist) to establish freedom for oppressed peoples, even though that is our bullshit rationale in pr whenever we want to annihilate another inconvenient nation to set up our crony network for robbing moneys and resources from these nations or to do our proxy war dance with Russia and China.

God help any nation that isn't cooperating with the US/NATO imperialism mafia that doesn't have a nuke. They are on the list.

With every drone strike we are spreading such hatred of America and we are creating reactionary terrorists against our terrorism which apparently works for our craven government to justify further terrorism for corporate profiteering. They don't care that troops are gratuitous cannon fodder. They don't care about civilian deaths in the thousands and thousands or displacement in the hundreds of thousands for these poor people in the cross fire.

Like we are fighting Naziism. America should really look in the mirror before assuming that is the case. Jingoist should be printed on your T-shirt!!!

Might makes right, and my country right or wrong? Are you seriously paying attention?

We destabilize the world and then we scream, the world is destabilized, we must further bomb the shit out of it to save it. And not to mention jeopardize us. Entrenching a spirit of anti-Americanism and distrust of our country for decades and decades to come.

The countries of the world should be cooperating to end the threats of climate change, but instead diplomacy is no longer part of the US toolbox. Only the hammer and every other country is a nail.

The Obama administration deliberately droned a 16 year old boy from Denver having dinner in Yemen at an outside restaurant (along with his cousin) because he was the son of Al Alawki. No due process. The kid was looking for his father who had been droned a week earlier with no due process but in what you call the field of battle? And when Robert Gibbs, had been part of the Obama administration, heard people were outraged he shrugged it off as that the kid should have had a more responsible father. So you DELIBERATELY DRONE THE SON who has not done anything because of his father?????

That is a justified motive for our government to murder????

end of my quote!

Obama and Congress have done impeachable offenses. The three branches of our government are saturated with such corruption that it seems only whistleblowers go to jail or are driven to suicide.

best, libby
What's going to be really cool is when our enemies (most of the rest of the world) catch up with us in drone tech.. NOT TO GET OFF TOPIC-- what was this blog about? Something about Obama being a sissy with femininesque shotgunning form? ? ?
Yeah well anyway, imagine the upcoming DRONE WARS.
Hugo Chavez jr. sitting at his command post in Venezuela launching attacks on the US Navy, or on US oil platforms (etc), then US retaliating... ad nauseum.
Who the fuck cares about justice or playing fair anyway rude? That went out with the wild west... pal. We humans want to use our new toys.
I feel like I reading a Springer episode. Rude, I don't know your political views or for that matter anyone else's here except perhaps Joiseys and Trigs. I came to read your post because of the "title." If I'm going to write about titties, I write about titties. If I'm going to write about pension poaching,I write about pension poaching. Putting the word drone twice in a 45 line piece that consists mainly of questioning Obama's skeet shooting skills doesn't give me reason to believe you want to talk about drones. If I have to second guess the underlying meaning behind your words you may as well be talking about titties. With that being said..there's 10 mins of my life I'll never get back.
That would be "I feel like I'm reading...." I hate to be put on fire for my typo. Apologies in advance.
You clearly don't know what you're talking about concerning 'targeted killing" of US citizens and the issue of congressional authorization. I don't think you've ever read the 5th amendment, either. The Posse Comitatus thing is sort of random, as the FBI does US terrorist enforcement, not the military. The President, as Commander-in-Cheif can clearly dictate specific military action.

You're assbabbling a bunch of back-of-cereal box constitutional anal ysis. It's really pretty funny, if you ain't you.
I anit got nothing agin killing mud squab - so long as they eats em' cause there be to many merikans who could put that shot to killin' supper.
yasee,thats whats cool bout the net,debate bout important social issues,with no diatribe.....gotta luv it...
what the hell is diatribe anyway?......
I apologize- I can't keep up with all this
Too much typing, and I;m too creaky to sit at this point

I'll try to get back on it tomorrow, but gonna be gone in the morning-

I few random comments


Licken your chops, huh?

To describe my work in AI to you would be to imply that I was interested in your opinion. I really can't imagine that. Surprise me. Find my work and comment on it in the appropriate venue and I'll answer you there.

Kosher- this started out with my seeing the picture and saying to myself OMFG! what is THAT!

Two things went through my mind- the number of times i'd been at a TRAP range shooting and seen someone like this come up beside me, and know just from long experience that it's time to get out of range because this is a guy who is dangerous- he has absolutely no idea what to do with a gun and shouldn't be turned loose with one- any of you who are shooters know this feeling and are hopefully wise enough to heed it.

It had this disclaimer apparently that the Justice department would throw my ass in jail if I photo shopped it.

My reaction was photo shop it? hell, that's a Michael Dukakis in the Tank moment! why would anyone photo shop it to show anything other than it does if they wanted to discredit Obama's statement about "Doing skeet" all the time ( he should say "Bust some clays")

Then I started thinking about why the picture IS so funny. First off He's holding the butt of the gun on the joint/collarbone- damn! that's not something you do twice with a 12 gauge.

Is that a 12 gauge? looks about proportional- what the heck is that little shiny thing in the muzzle and what's that puff of smoke on the barrel? let's ask some people- this is just too good to waste, I wonder who else thought immediately of the Dukakis Photo?

So let's post it . It says everything that needs to be said about letting this guy near you with a lethal weapon- much less a drone.

That was how this got here- believe it or don't

Everything else, including Bill's proof that the puff of smoke has an actual reasonable explanation, is just a sidetrack

The post IS about trusting the guy with the POWER to kill, much less the Authority- It's fortunate that he doesn't have that authority.

seer- That's exactly the way I took it- :-)


Yeah, people really should think about the precedent set for Drone wars--

I can't type anymore- back later
I didn't know you shoot skeet at a 45 degree angle to the ground or that Obama has a pot gut.
OK, so here's what I want to know?
What does skeet shooting have to do with drones? You think in order to use them, the President goes down to a basement somewhere and steers them himself? You figure maybe he doesn't make sure they're gassed up before they launch?

What is your point about how he shoots being connected to his being the Commander In Chief, including control over the use of drones?

Give me the connection.

"The President Can't Shoot and Just Embarrassed Himself"? OK. "The President is a Phony Lying Murderous Bastard and This Helps Prove It?" Not so much. Too much poetic license.
Back in September of 2011, I wrote a post that was largely about the drone issue. I posed the question:

Is Obama Changing Our Approach To War In Ways We Want?

I didn't get very many responses on this one, but I gave it a real shot. Not smearing. Issues. It's not that I'm lookiing for a lot of responses on a post that's a year and a half old, but the approach looked at issues instead of generating a lot of heat about skeat.

It's all about Integrity and character. There is no CORE ( heart) there, no solid structure within.

He is a shapeshifter who will take on any role, tell any story, his "people" say he must, in order to retain and expand his control.

You may think that such "Dirty Hands" are acceptable, but the problem with such a man is that he is capable of doing ANYTHING

he is Pilate asking "What is Truth?"

It's all about Integrity and character. There is no CORE ( heart) there, no solid structure within. There is no "There" there

He is a shapeshifter who will take on any role, tell any story, his "people" say he must, in order to retain and expand his control.

You may think that such "Dirty Hands" are acceptable, but the problem with such a man is that he is capable of doing ANYTHING

he is Pilate asking "What is Truth?", just before he crucifies it.
He's not a particularly powerful President. In fact, I'd say he's on the other end of the spectrum. If he is reduced to posing for pictures with rifles, it's because his aims have been thwarted enough that he'll do bizarre things to do what he thinks needs to be done. That a President largely vilified by his allies for being ineffective would struggle to increase his power is quite predictable.

If that's what hs is, that's what the Republican opposition made him. This is a man who, during budgetary negotiations, gave away about 85% of the store and still couldn't close the deal, to the point where his country almost went into default. This is a man who couldn't close single payer health care. I've watched him try to govern as a centrist barely liberal and be portrayed as the Second Coming of Karl Marx. I've seen him disrespected in unprecedented ways, like the shouting of "You Lie!" during a State of the Union address on national television. I've seen an insane crusade about his birth certificate. I've seen the Senate Minority Leader say, near the beginning of his term when they'd barely negotiated over anything, that the primary goal of the next four years was to make sure this guy wasn't re-elected, and he turned out to be the Least liberal of the major Democratic candidates.

His job is to govern and integrity didn't work. Ok, what do we need to do, pose with a f*cking rifle so that we can finally accomplish something, like produce any legislation in response to Newtown with an enormous political wind at our backs?

In typical fashion with what the GOP has turned into, they shaped this President then blamed him for being what they created.

The trouble with this contention is that it's backward. Yes, his governing style is conciliatory, and he kept ramping it up until he looked shapeless, but he kept ramping it up because nothing worked. I've been watching Washington a long time and I've never seen a President's actions treated as this irrelevant before. From the beginning, the portrait of the President wasn't actually of the President, it was of whoever they thought would be easiest to defeat in the next election.

To blame him for being what his opposition created him to be is hypocrisy.
"If that's what hs is, that's what the Republican opposition made him. "

Bullshit. Goddess knows I hate the Republicans, but they did NOT make Obama escalate the drone strikes, they did NOT make him target American citizens and they did NOT murder innocent children. Stop making excuses for him. He needs to OWN that and face the consequences.

"His job is to govern and integrity didn't work. "

Bullshit Part II. YOU admitted that he hasn't governed, but has only weak-spine compromised. As for EVER having shown integrity? You mean like actually fulfilling campaign promises? You mean like NOT making behind the scene deals with some asshat who he tells " Your are my first choice" or some such, while his other proposed SecState candidate is still standing next to the bus (that he then pushes her under?), etc. (I can EASILY keep going!). Bottom line is "Integrity" is something that Obama has NEVER shown one iota of. Its also something that I know YOU have no respect for either, in regards to politics, so I think that it is HIGHLY hypocritical of YOU to dare bring that subject up, Mr. "Screw Purity"! (which was a sorry ass, passive-aggressive insult that shows you've always missed the point, BTW)
As long as you think it's more moral to posture than to accomplish anything, you'll never understand a damned thing I write.

I've noticed you never came up with an answer about Kennedy. Should he have refused to compromise on anything and not pushed ADA through? And please, please, please don't give me an answer about Harvard, Chappaquiddick, or anything else that talks about his character without answering the question, because my question isn't about his character, it's about what the right thing to do was.

Though this might be illustrative of the difference between us. I think the most important thing about public service is what you do, not what you are, because you're elected to do, not to be.

I'm not defending drones; drones aren't what he's hit opposition about. I at least wrote a post posing the question about drones in such a way that someone who supports Obama could read it without dismissing it automatically and actually consider it. What do you do? Post lists and think you accomplished something. Accomplished what? Showing people the sheer hypocrisy of anyone who defends Obama under any circumstances?

Which people?

If you want to know if you're reaching anyone, ask yourself whose position seems to be shifting as a result of what you're doing. You read the comments - well, you sort of read the comments - so, notice anyone moving? Notice the conversation going anywhere? Do you think you get Brownie Points for printing lists, like you're saving up for a merit badge?

Whose mind do you think you're changing, and how do you think you're changing it?

Doesn't it matter to you at all whether or not you're effective? Do you like being dismissed? Do you get a moral rush out of being dismissed?

Has it ever even occurred to you to ask how the Hell you could move your agenda further without being dismissed?

Who exactly do you think is giving you an A for Effort?

My position is this:

I think it's immoral not to care.

Someone who tries to dig a hole with a spoon instead of a shovel isn't noble because of the effort expended, just stupid.
Gee... all those words insulting & personally attacking me and you didn't address the issues even once. (and no, further blog whoring your own post again doesn't count).

You been getting troll lessons from bill beck, KS???
Most of those were questions, none of which I notice you touch with a ten foot pole.

I think you're assuming that my agenda is to defend Obama. That's certainly how you respond. It isn't. It's to have a discussion about him that actually makes sense. I don't think we even agree as to what his job should be or what any politician's job should be.

Your model appears operationally too close to Newt Gingrich for my tastes. Demonize the opposition, eliminate the opposition, then get clear sailing after you do.

So now you're relying on Guilt By Association? I reach my own opinions. I have friends but I am a wholely independent operator here. If you can't get at me directly, tie me to someone else? It's a cheap way to argue. Group like mad, so if any one individual in a group screws up, you can paint all of them with the screwup. I don't play that. You do all the time. Is this your version of integrity?
Oh, regarding addressing the issues, being as we're on this particular blog,

You mean the issue of whether or not a photograph of the President skeet-shooting was PhotoShopped, or do you mean the issue of whether or not the President has a clue what he's doing with that rifle?
Oh, regarding addressing the issues, being as we're on this particular blog,

You mean the issue of whether or not a photograph of the President skeet-shooting was PhotoShopped, or do you mean the issue of whether or not the President has a clue what he's doing with that rifle?

Don't let her rush you, Kosh. You are going to get lots of shit about that "rifle."
I don't know from guns. It's not a pistol. It's not a submachine gun. It's not a bazooka. I think a Glock is something on the wall with a second hand. I think a Luger is a former Senator from Indiana. I think a Remington is something you shave with or type on. I think Smith and Wesson is a garden accessories catalog. I think a Colt is something you pop the tab on and drink. I think a Revolver is a Beatles album. I think an Uzi is what Jack takes a bath in.

Telling me I'm ignorant about firearms won't exactly hurt my feelings.
And I think 30 odd 6 makes no sense because 30 and 6 are even.
Remember Richard "Would you buy a used car from this man?" Nixon?

Now, ask yourself about Obama

Would this man LIE to me?

He does nothing but.
Sure I remember him. Hated him at the time. He got us out of Vietnam, opened relations with China at a time when we didn't even talk to them and Mao was still in charge, and founded the Environmental Protection Agency. He was personally a miserably paranoid individual who actually did a decent amount for his country and did so competently. The difference between Richard Nixon and, say, George W. Bush in terms of policy is utterly startling - in comparison, Nixon was liberal almost to the point of radicalism. He was way to the left of Reagan (where Reagan ended up), who was in turn way to the left of Bush II. There are other countries who wonder why we don't revere Nixon more. As I said at the beginning: At the time, I hated him, because I had no idea what was coming.
I hated Nixon- I hate Obama
for much the same reason

Ends and means- the final test
I guess we'll just have to agree to fight it out.
The assassination of a President is justified if the feeling that he is a threat is strong enough?
Hopefully, he'll be impeached first.

Kosher. you are far more warrior than you think.

So finally we've rounded up this mess of a conversation with a choice--

Impeachment . . . or Assassination!

You betcha- same moral and LEGAL justification as the president uses- imminent danger to the country- Of course, it would be WRONG, but that's the point, isn't it? IT"S WRONG-
This comment thread makes me pine for the days, not so long ago, when nobody could log on to OS.
Comments are now closed.