Barack Obama Warns Americans about His Second Term as President of the United States

[lonestar]

Barack Obama Warns Americans about His Second Term as President of the United States
April 4, 2012 byda Tagliare

If you think Barack Obama has been bad for the country during his first term as president, just wait till he is re-elected.

During the first three years in office, he has openly ignored and violated dozens of federal laws as well as numerous provisions in the US Constitution and Bill of Rights. There has never been a president in the history of our nation guilty of more crimes against the American people than Barack Obama.

He publicly stated that he didn’t care what the Constitution said. He’s also publicly told us that he does not intend to uphold all of the immigration laws. Then he turned around and ordered the Department of Justice to stop enforcing the Marriage Defense Act. A sitting president does not have the legal power to disregard an act of Congress, but he doesn’t care about the law.

Obamacare has at least 4 central provisions that are unconstitutional, but that doesn’t stop him from enacting it anyway. Besides being unconstitutional, Obamacare will raise taxes of every American by a substantial amount, even though Obama promises to not raise taxes on middle and poverty class citizens.

Barack Obama has also declared war on Christianity. His directives have been aimed at destroying Christian liberties while at the same time giving many of those liberties to his Muslim brothers.

The list of his atrocities against the American people is too long to list here. But it will be nothing compared to what he has planned for his second term and he’s told us so, indirectly.

When he met with out-going Russian President Dimitri Medvedev last week, Obama told him to wait for his second term as he will be more flexible to do more. He’s also said it several more times, which is a clear indication that the worse is yet to come.

I’ve read a number of commentaries on this exchange and most of them seem to center upon a possible secret deal with the Russians, but Obama’s statement goes much further than that, it’s a warning to Americans as to what will be next.

Believe it or not, Obama has held back many of his desired policies for a second term. His main goal at this point is get re-elected. He doesn’t want to do anything too drastic that would hurt his chances of re-election.

However, once elected to a second term, he doesn’t have to worry about another election. He will be much freer to ‘be more flexible’ with his agenda to take completely transform America into a socialist state.

If the past three years are any indication, feeling he has more flexibility in a second term should be terrifying to all of us. Couple this new flexibility with his blatant disregard for the Constitution, Congress and federal law, there will be no stopping him from carrying out his sordid plans.

Both Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum should pick up on this and hammer it into the minds of every American from now until the election. They need to use this as one of their main campaign issues. Perhaps this will resonate with more Americans.

http://godfatherpolitics.com/4520/barack-obama-warns-americans-about-his-second-term-as-president/

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Lonestar ID?
<wbr> (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)

https://s-external.ak.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQD--4wS-mXi6Pth&w=90&h=90&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.addictinginfo.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F04%2FScreen-shot-2012-04-06-at-3.36.17-PM-292x300.jpg (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)Another Military Sergeant Trashes The Commander-In-Chief On Facebook (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)

Joel Thomson is a Technical Sergeant for the United States Air Force. Joel Thomson has a captivating smile, lively blue eyes and an apparent love for animals. Joel Thomson really hates his Commander in Chief, enough to call him a Muslim and far worse, the son of Satan.

[lonestar]

Lonestar ID?
<wbr> (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)

https://s-external.ak.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQD--4wS-mXi6Pth&w=90&h=90&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.addictinginfo.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F04%2FScreen-shot-2012-04-06-at-3.36.17-PM-292x300.jpg (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)Another Military Sergeant Trashes The Commander-In-Chief On Facebook (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)

Joel Thomson is a Technical Sergeant for the United States Air Force. Joel Thomson has a captivating smile, lively blue eyes and an apparent love for animals. Joel Thomson really hates his Commander in Chief, enough to call him a Muslim and far worse, the son of Satan.



probably knows what he is talking about..

but then his career is most likely over..

[W*GS]

lonestar must be paid by "godfatherpolitics" to spread their ****...

If he's not, he's a cheap slut.

[Requiem]

Four more years brothers!

[ghwk]

Lonestar ID?
<wbr> (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)

https://s-external.ak.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQD--4wS-mXi6Pth&w=90&h=90&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.addictinginfo.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F04%2FScreen-shot-2012-04-06-at-3.36.17-PM-292x300.jpg (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)Another Military Sergeant Trashes The Commander-In-Chief On Facebook (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)

Joel Thomson is a Technical Sergeant for the United States Air Force. Joel Thomson has a captivating smile, lively blue eyes and an apparent love for animals. Joel Thomson really hates his Commander in Chief, enough to call him a Muslim and far worse, the son of Satan.

Close but no. Otherwise there would be a pic of Bobo's cock in his mouth to prove his loyalty to whatever make believe cause he thinks he's championing.

How's this thread going for you so far bonerstar?

[ant1999e]

Lonestar ID?
<wbr> (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)

https://s-external.ak.fbcdn.net/safe_image.php?d=AQD--4wS-mXi6Pth&w=90&h=90&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.addictinginfo.org%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2012%2F04%2FScreen-shot-2012-04-06-at-3.36.17-PM-292x300.jpg (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)Another Military Sergeant Trashes The Commander-In-Chief On Facebook (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/04/06/another-military-sergeant-trashes-the-commander-in-chief-on-facebook/)

Joel Thomson is a Technical Sergeant for the United States Air Force. Joel Thomson has a captivating smile, lively blue eyes and an apparent love for animals. Joel Thomson really hates his Commander in Chief, enough to call him a Muslim and far worse, the son of Satan.

Why do you hate the military?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Why do you hate the military?

Why are asinine straw man arguments your bread and butter?

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Love your arguments, guys. Keep digging. LOL

[bowtown]

Obama has also "indirectly" hinted on several occasions that if re-elected he's going to eat all the babies in the world and enslave old people. Is everyone sufficiently terrified of the most moderate president in history yet, because if not, I can keep making **** up and posting it as fact.

[BroncsRule]

Why do you hate the military?

I seem to recall that LABF is a veteran.

Are you?

[elsid13]

Obama has also "indirectly" hinted on several occasions that if re-elected he's going to eat all the babies in the world and enslave old people. Is everyone sufficiently terrified of the most moderate president in history yet, because if not, I can keep making **** up and posting it as fact.

What worse is I hear that Obama going to make kids watch Ghostbuster one AND two.

[bowtown]

What worse is I hear that Obama going to make kids watch Ghostbuster one AND two.

Little known fact: Ghostbusters was Stalin's favorite movie. Also, Mao invented birth control.

[Rigs11]

I heard Obama is going to solve the hunger problem by making soup..out of poor defenseless cute puppies.and he's gonna sign a law that you can't have bacon in your burger.

[bowtown]

I heard Obama is going to solve the hunger problem by making soup..out of poor defenseless cute puppies.and he's gonna sign a law that you can't have bacon in your burger.

He also has a plan in place to abolish the death penalty except for veterans and bald eagles.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

And, worst of all, I hear he's planning to make HoHo's and lonestar's kids ride in the same school buses and go to the same schools as black kids! Yikes!

[elsid13]

He also has a plan in place to abolish the death penalty except for veterans and bald eagles.

I heard Obama is going to force vets to make bald eagle soup for the OWS crowd to recieve thier penisions.

[bowtown]

And, worst of all, I hear he's planning to make HoHo's and lonestar's kids ride in the same school buses and go to the same schools as black kids! Yikes!

And study nothing but Gay Latino history.

[chadta]

he's gonna sign a law that you can't have bacon in your burger.

ill never visit the states again

[Rohirrim]

It's just another illustration of how incredibly stupid a great swath of the American people are. Obama is the radical? Really? Obama is the extremist? Obama wants to hold on to Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and other government programs that benefit millions of Americans and he is the threat?

It used to be, when we actually used dictionaries to define the meaning of words, that a radical, or an extremist, was somebody who came along and wanted to tear down what existed; They want to abolish the status quo. That's what revolutionaries and extremists do - they tear down what exists. I don't see Obama doing that. I see him trying to defend what the American people have voted for, instituted, and relied on for decades. So who does want to tear it down? Who does have the radical, extremist agenda?

The terms of the Ryan budget are no less startling because, by now, they have started to become familiar. The budget calls for dramatically reducing what the federal government spends on Medicaid, then turning it over to the states. According to a joint analysis from the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Urban Institute, between 14 million and 27 million people would lose health insurance as a result. (This doesn’t include 17 million who, by that estimate, would lose Medicaid via repeal of the Affordable Care Act.) At the same time, it would reduce discretionary spending so radically that according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “most of the federal government aside from Social Security, health care, and defense would cease to exist” by 2050.

The budget would also transform Medicare into a voucher program, eliminating the program’s present guarantee of benefits. The funding cut isn’t as dramatic as the one in the last Ryan budget. But if Republicans got their way and realized that eliminating the federal government meant, among other things, eliminating the Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Bureau of Investigation, Medicare would likely emerge as a candidate for deeper cuts. The cuts would be necessary, in part, because the Republicans remain committed to reducing taxes on the wealthiest Americans—and to the proposition, contrary to available evidence, that such cuts will strengthen the economy.
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/102395/obama-ryan-budget-speech-supreme-court-medicaid-welfare-state

So who are the radicals? Who are the extremists?

Some people need to get their heads out of their asses, open their eyes, and start to take a critical look at who exactly is taking America down.

Does anybody realize that the Supreme Court might use this health care ruling to also find that the setup for Medicaid is unconstitutional as well? Because they could.

[ant1999e]

I seem to recall that LABF is a veteran.

Are you?

17 years so far. How long was LABF in for?

[TonyR]

This doesn't fit perfectly here in this discussion, but it is another great example of how much many on the right "misremember" things...


Which president’s economic recovery benefited most from an increasing number of government jobs? Oddly enough, it was President Ronald Reagan, who successfully ran for re-election in 1984 by proclaiming it was “morning in America.” Reagan, running in a year when unemployment fell over a percentage point to 7.5 percent, is generally (and incorrectly) remembered as the first conservative president to dramatically shrink the size and role of government.

http://www.businessinsider.com/reagan-recovery-was-all-about-big-government-spending-2012-4

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

17 years so far. How long was LABF in for?

::)

What difference does that make?

I sense a Swift Boat attack coming...

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It's just another illustration of how incredibly stupid a great swath of the American people are. Obama is the radical? Really? Obama is the extremist? Obama wants to hold on to Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare and other government programs that benefit millions of Americans and he is the threat?

It used to be, when we actually used dictionaries to define the meaning of words, that a radical, or an extremist, was somebody who came along and wanted to tear down what existed; They want to abolish the status quo. That's what revolutionaries and extremists do - they tear down what exists. I don't see Obama doing that. I see him trying to defend what the American people have voted for, instituted, and relied on for decades. So who does want to tear it down? Who does have the radical, extremist agenda?

The terms of the Ryan budget are no less startling because, by now, they have started to become familiar. The budget calls for dramatically reducing what the federal government spends on Medicaid, then turning it over to the states. According to a joint analysis from the Kaiser Family Foundation and the Urban Institute, between 14 million and 27 million people would lose health insurance as a result. (This doesn’t include 17 million who, by that estimate, would lose Medicaid via repeal of the Affordable Care Act.) At the same time, it would reduce discretionary spending so radically that according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, “most of the federal government aside from Social Security, health care, and defense would cease to exist” by 2050.

The budget would also transform Medicare into a voucher program, eliminating the program’s present guarantee of benefits. The funding cut isn’t as dramatic as the one in the last Ryan budget. But if Republicans got their way and realized that eliminating the federal government meant, among other things, eliminating the Federal Aviation Administration and Federal Bureau of Investigation, Medicare would likely emerge as a candidate for deeper cuts. The cuts would be necessary, in part, because the Republicans remain committed to reducing taxes on the wealthiest Americans—and to the proposition, contrary to available evidence, that such cuts will strengthen the economy.
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/102395/obama-ryan-budget-speech-supreme-court-medicaid-welfare-state

So who are the radicals? Who are the extremists?

Some people need to get their heads out of their asses, open their eyes, and start to take a critical look at who exactly is taking America down.

Does anybody realize that the Supreme Court might use this health care ruling to also find that the setup for Medicaid is unconstitutional as well? Because they could.

Yep.

The Repukes are certainly skilled at attributing their own faults to the opposition.

[ant1999e]

::)

What difference does that make?

I sense a Swift Boat attack coming...

I'm just curious. Why avoid the question? Be proud to declare your military service record.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I'm just curious. Why avoid the question?

Because your motive for asking is questionable.

[bowtown]

I'm just curious. Why avoid the question? Be proud to declare your military service record.

Like GWB?

[ant1999e]

Like GWB?

Sure, if it makes you feel good.

[ant1999e]

Because your motive for asking is questionable.

Is it my motive or your military service that is questionable???

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Is it my motive or your military service that is questionable???

Your motive for asking the question - considering it followed on the heels of a bullsh*t attack on my patriotism.

[ant1999e]

Your motive for asking the question - considering it followed on the heels of a bullsh*t attack on my patriotism.

I'm just responding to this


I seem to recall that LABF is a veteran.

Are you?

So, are you a veteran and if so, how many years did you serve? I'm just curious. I would think that if you were proud of your service you would have no problem with the question.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

So, are you a veteran and if so, how many years did you serve? I'm just curious. I would think that if you were proud of your service you would have no problem with the question.

Already answered numerous times.

[ant1999e]

Already answered numerous times.

Usually you like to post links and always demand that people provide proof. That's cool, keep it a secret.
People usually don't mind talking about things they're proud of, strange.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

So, are you a veteran and if so, how many years did you serve? I'm just curious. I would think that if you were proud of your service you would have no problem with the question.That thread was done over 5 years ago.

And it matters not one fricking iota how many years service every veteran has behind him.

[Rohirrim]

I've always noticed on this board that most of those on the Left have served, while fewer on the Right have.

3 years. Army Infantry here.

[ant1999e]

I've always noticed on this board that most of those on the Left have served, while fewer on the Right have.

3 years. Army Infantry here.

Thanks for the service.
I think your reaching with your analysis. Quite silly actually. I was a Democrat in the late 90's and changed my Outlook on life later like, I always say, when I grew up.

[ant1999e]

That thread was done over 5 years ago.

And it matters not one fricking iota how many years service every veteran has behind him.

When it comes to dedication to service and the military I disagree. Although I think its honorable that anyone serve for however long or little, dedication and connection to the military MAY not be as strong with someone who only served for a few years. And notice I said MAY not.

[Rohirrim]

Thanks for the service.
I think your reaching with your analysis. Quite silly actually. I was a Democrat in the late 90's and changed my Outlook on life later like, I always say, when I grew up.

I'm an independent progressive. Not a democrat.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Usually you like to post links and always demand that people provide proof. That's cool, keep it a secret.
People usually don't mind talking about things they're proud of, strange.

::)

How can it be a "secret" when I've already discussed here God knows how many times?

[ant1999e]

::)

How can it be a "secret" when I've already discussed here God knows how many times?

I've been here for a while and never seen anything. I must have missed those threads. Regardless, it's a simple question to answer, watch:

Someone: Ant, how may years have you been in the military?
Ant: I've been in for about 17 years. Proud to serve but ready to retire.

See, easy.

Now, if there's something you're hiding or don't want to talk about, I could see a reluctance to answer. So like I said, that's cool.

[chadta]

I've been here for a while and never seen anything. I must have missed those threads. Regardless, it's a simple question to answer, watch:

Someone: Ant, how may years have you been in the military?
Ant: I've been in for about 17 years. Proud to serve but ready to retire.

See, easy.

Now, if there's something you're hiding or don't want to talk about, I could see a reluctance to answer. So like I said, that's cool.

While i agree that he should be proud and have no issue saying just how long, really who cares, get over it, move on.

What a week this has been, ive agreed with spider, and now im defending labf

[Rohirrim]

Thanks for the service.
I think your reaching with your analysis. Quite silly actually. I was a Democrat in the late 90's and changed my Outlook on life later like, I always say, when I grew up.

Not really. Some years ago somebody did a poll on here. The people on the Left who had been in the service outnumbered those on the Right about 2 to 1. I'm sure it's still in the archives somewhere. I remember at the time the dominant point of discussion was Cheney's 14 deferments and how eager he was to start a war, but reluctant to join in.

[ant1999e]

While i agree that he should be proud and have no issue saying just how long, really who cares, get over it, move on.

What a week this has been, ive agreed with spider, and now im defending labf

I've offered to "move on" twice already but LABF responds so I respond back.

What's funny is that LABF calls everyone he disagrees with a liar and always demands proof. I'm just holding him to his own standards.

Usually you like to post links and always demand that people provide proof. That's cool, keep it a secret.
People usually don't mind talking about things they're proud of, strange.

I've been here for a while and never seen anything. I must have missed those threads. Regardless, it's a simple question to answer, watch:

Someone: Ant, how may years have you been in the military?
Ant: I've been in for about 17 years. Proud to serve but ready to retire.

See, easy.

Now, if there's something you're hiding or don't want to talk about, I could see a reluctance to answer. So like I said, that's cool.

[ant1999e]

Not really. Some years ago somebody did a poll on here. The people on the Left who had been in the service outnumbered those on the Right about 2 to 1. I'm sure it's still in the archives somewhere. I remember at the time the dominant point of discussion was Cheney's 14 deferments and how eager he was to start a war, but reluctant to join in.

I must have missed that one. Must have been around the same time LABF talked about his military service.
If Democrats care so much for the military, why is that the place where they always want to make the cuts? They must know that the first people that feel these cuts are the active duty and retirees.

[Rohirrim]

I must have missed that one. Must have been around the same time LABF talked about his military service.
If Democrats care so much for the military, why is that the place where they always want to make the cuts? They must know that the first people that feel these cuts are the active duty and retirees.

I can't speak for Dems, but I think most reasonable people would look at our military and think is was extreme overkill:

http://cdn1.globalissues.org/i/military/11/country-distribution-2010.png


As James Madison put it:
Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes … known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.… No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

[ant1999e]

Like I said, you can cut from the budget but the first ones to feel it are the active duty and retirees.

[Rohirrim]

Like I said, you can cut from the budget but the first ones to feel it are the active duty and retirees.

It's not the pensions and pay that need to be addressed. That should be about last on the agenda:

Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.

This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the militaryindustrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together. (Eisenhower)

It's so integrated into our society now that, like Rome, we've lost control of the beast.

[ant1999e]

I can't speak for Dems, but I think most reasonable people would look at our military and think is was extreme overkill:

http://cdn1.globalissues.org/i/military/11/country-distribution-2010.png


As James Madison put it:
Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes … known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.… No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/06/confronting-the-unsustainable-growth-of-welfare-entitlements-principles-of-reform-and-the-next-steps

[ant1999e]

Maybe here?

[Rohirrim]

Yeah. I've seen those misrepresentations from the Heritage Foundation before. It's a bit of "creative" accounting. Besides, "growth" of spending does not represent total spending. Here's another take.

Current military” includes Dept. of Defense ($653 billion), the military portion from other departments ($150 billion), and an additional $162 billion to supplement the Budget’s misleading and vast underestimate of only $38 billion for the “war on terror.” “Past military” represents veterans’ benefits plus 80% of the interest on the debt.*

The Government Deception

The pie chart below is the government view of the budget. This is a distortion of how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), and the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending. For a more accurate representation of how your Federal income tax dollar is really spent, see the large chart (below).

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/images/FY09_deception.gif

Source: Congressional Budget Office for FY2008

These figures are from an analysis of detailed tables in the “Analytical Perspectives” book of the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009. The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 15, 2008, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget. The government practice of combining trust and federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller.
http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/images/pieFY09.gif

[ant1999e]

Yeah. I've seen those misrepresentations from the Heritage Foundation before. It's a bit of "creative" accounting. Besides, "growth" of spending does not represent total spending. Here's another take.

Current military” includes Dept. of Defense ($653 billion), the military portion from other departments ($150 billion), and an additional $162 billion to supplement the Budget’s misleading and vast underestimate of only $38 billion for the “war on terror.” “Past military” represents veterans’ benefits plus 80% of the interest on the debt.*

The Government Deception

The pie chart below is the government view of the budget. This is a distortion of how our income tax dollars are spent because it includes Trust Funds (e.g., Social Security), and the expenses of past military spending are not distinguished from nonmilitary spending. For a more accurate representation of how your Federal income tax dollar is really spent, see the large chart (below).

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/images/FY09_deception.gif

Source: Congressional Budget Office for FY2008

These figures are from an analysis of detailed tables in the “Analytical Perspectives” book of the Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2009. The figures are federal funds, which do not include trust funds — such as Social Security — that are raised and spent separately from income taxes. What you pay (or don’t pay) by April 15, 2008, goes to the federal funds portion of the budget. The government practice of combining trust and federal funds began during the Vietnam War, thus making the human needs portion of the budget seem larger and the military portion smaller.
http://www.warresisters.org/pages/piechart.htm

http://www.warresisters.org/pages/images/pieFY09.gif

And your info comes from WarResisters.org. I'm sure they're on the up and up.

[Requiem]

I've been here for a while and never seen anything. I must have missed those threads. Regardless, it's a simple question to answer, watch:

Someone: Ant, how may years have you been in the military?
Ant: I've been in for about 17 years. Proud to serve but ready to retire.

See, easy.

Now, if there's something you're hiding or don't want to talk about, I could see a reluctance to answer. So like I said, that's cool.

Maybe people online don't need to use their military background as a dick measuring stick. People like L.A. would rather be humble about it and go about his merry way. He served. Whether or not you believe him doesn't matter.

My grandfather served as a PFC in WWII and was shot down in the Ardennes. He hardly ever talks about his service, even if he is asked about it. A lot of repressed memories and things he saw that he'd rather not go down.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Maybe people online don't need to use their military background as a dick measuring stick. People like L.A. would rather be humble about it and go about his merry way. He served. Whether or not you believe him doesn't matter.


Exactly.

It turns out I was in the same branch and organization as another OM member. We had a discussion about it here a while back. I'm not going to recap the whole thing for some Swift Boater.

[ant1999e]

Maybe people online don't need to use their military background as a dick measuring stick. People like L.A. would rather be humble about it and go about his merry way. He served. Whether or not you believe him doesn't matter.

My grandfather served as a PFC in WWII and was shot down in the Ardennes. He hardly ever talks about his service, even if he is asked about it. A lot of repressed memories and things he saw that he'd rather not go down.

Your right, so you should have just kept your dick measuring hole shut and minded your own business. LABF is a big boy and can defend himself.

A simple question as how many years a person served is by no means taking a trip down the WW2 memory lane but nice way to misuse your grandfathers honorable service numbnuts.

P.S. In regards to your first statement, the conversation was changed to LABF's military service by someone besides me so it was made relevant.

[ant1999e]

Exactly.

It turns out I was in the same branch and organization as another OM member. We had a discussion about it here a while back. I'm not going to recap the whole thing for some Swift Boater.

You'll tell me all this but not how many years you served???

I never asked for a complete recap. I simply asked for one number. Someone brought up the fact that you served and I merely asked how many years. I didn't know my curiosity would turn into one of Gaffs conspiracy theories.

The fact that you refuse to say makes me wonder why. But hey, I don't want to bring back any WW2 flashbacks so forget I asked.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

You'll tell me all this but not how many years you served???

I never asked for a complete recap. I simply asked for one number. Someone brought up the fact that you served and I merely asked how many years. I didn't know my curiosity would turn into one of Gaffs conspiracy theories.

The fact that you refuse to say makes me wonder why. But hey, I don't want to bring back any WW2 flashbacks so forget I asked.

I don't "refuse to say."

I just refuse to discuss the matter with you.

Why would I invite one of these?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/04/169_bandaid.jpg

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The fact that you refuse to say makes me wonder why.

Here's a hint:

Don't start the conversation with "why do you hate the military?"

[ant1999e]

I don't "refuse to say."

I just refuse to discuss the matter with you.

Why would I invite one of these?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/top10/04/169_bandaid.jpg

Deflecting...

[ant1999e]

Here's a hint:

Don't start the conversation with "why do you hate the military?"

The negative article about the servicemember you posted had nothing to do with the thread. Seemed like a pointless attack. But what else would I expect from you?

Is it because they wronged you while you were in? Some sort of hazing incident? You don't have to hate the whole for what a few did.

[Requiem]

What a douche.

[Requiem]

A simple question as how many years a person served is by no means taking a trip down the WW2 memory lane but nice way to misuse your grandfathers honorable service numbnuts.

P.S. In regards to your first statement, the conversation was changed to LABF's military service by someone besides me so it was made relevant.

It is the same concept. Willingness to discuss their service. Neither seem to want to do so. And L.A. certainly won't when he has a dude his age acting like a petulant child to obtain that information from him.

[Rohirrim]

And your info comes from WarResisters.org. I'm sure they're on the up and up.

Read where their figures come from.

[ant1999e]

It is the same concept. Willingness to discuss their service. Neither seem to want to do so. And L.A. certainly won't when he has a dude his age acting like a petulant child to obtain that information from him.

The fact that you would compare my asking LA how long he served for to the horrors of war that your grandfather experienced proves to me that you really don't grasp the concept of war. You really should be ashamed and embarrassed for your foolishness.
As for the petulant child, that describes 75% of the people in the WRP threads definitely including LABF. And his age? Dare I ask what age he is?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

The negative article about the servicemember you posted had nothing to do with the thread. Seemed like a pointless attack. But what else would I expect from you?

The service member in question publicly trashed the Commander in Chief on Facebook, and I'm the one making the "pointless attack?"

Shoot the messenger much?

And how is it that you've spent 17 years in the service and still don't know that what the guy did was a no-no?

Is it because they wronged you while you were in? Some sort of hazing incident? You don't have to hate the whole for what a few did.

::)

There you go falling back on your original "why do you hate the military?" straw man again.

You were probably one of those "super patriots" who called people "traitors" for questioning or opposing Bush's invasion and occupation of Iraq, so I suppose I shouldn't be surprised.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It is the same concept. Willingness to discuss their service. Neither seem to want to do so. And L.A. certainly won't when he has a dude his age acting like a petulant child to obtain that information from him.

Exactly.

His behavior leads me to believe he's never been in any sort of combat situation, police action, etc.

Otherwise, he'd realize some vets don't like to talk about their experiences.

[Requiem]

The fact that you would compare my asking LA how long he served for to the horrors of war that your grandfather experienced proves to me that you really don't grasp the concept of war. You really should be ashamed and embarrassed for your foolishness.
As for the petulant child, that describes 75% of the people in the WRP threads definitely including LABF. And his age? Dare I ask what age he is?

Let me ask you this. After your service in the military, what have you done with your life in the realm of work?

[lonestar]

Let me ask you this. After your service in the military, what have you done with your life in the realm of work?

Originally Posted by ant1999e View Post
I've been here for a while and never seen anything. I must have missed those threads. Regardless, it's a simple question to answer, watch:

Someone: Ant, how may years have you been in the military?
Ant: I've been in for about 17 years. Proud to serve but ready to retire.

See, easy.

Now, if there's something you're hiding or don't want to talk about, I could see a reluctance to answer. So like I said, that's cool.

RIF

talk about calling someone a douche.

Ant I commend you for your sacrifice for serving..

dream should be ashamed of himself for calling anyone that has served a douche..

[That One Guy]

Requiem and Ant are both over the line in this thread. Req tried to throw out LABF's service record to make Ant look stupid so Ant is now trying to do the "well I have more" to win. Military records shouldn't be used as badges and anyone doing so should be ashamed. I've known people who did more in two years than my dad did in 28 but both should absolutely be proud of their service.

[That One Guy]

Let me ask you this. After your service in the military, what have you done with your life in the realm of work?

Lame ass question. Back the F off.

[Requiem]

dream should be ashamed of himself for calling anyone that has served a douche..

No, I really shouldn't. The dubbing of him being a douche comes from his actions on the forum, not his service.

You can serve in the military and still be a douche of a person.

Didn't see the part that he said he had been in there his whole life, but that is what I figured based on the way he acted.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Requiem and Ant are both over the line in this thread. Req tried to throw out LABF's service record to make Ant look stupid so Ant is now trying to do the "well I have more" to win. Military records shouldn't be used as badges and anyone doing so should be ashamed. I've known people who did more in two years than my dad did in 28 but both should absolutely be proud of their service.

Ant didn't need any help from Requiem to look stupid - he already accomplished that mission when he asked me "why do you hate the military?"

[Requiem]

Lame ass question. Back the F off.

No, it is completely relevant one based on how he is going about his business with L.A.

[Requiem]

Ant didn't need any help from Requiem to look stupid - he already accomplished that mission when he asked me "why do you hate the military?"

Bingo. Then the onslaught of, "Well Democrats hate the military and wanna cut this and that!" talk started without a hitch, right on cue, as usual. Hilarious!

[That One Guy]

No, it is completely relevant one based on how he is going about his business with L.A.

I said that was pretty ****ty for him to try to make it a pissing contest but you can't disregard his 17 years of service (you commented above that you didn't notice he had been in all his life so maybe the comment was from beforehand) and came across as asking what else he had done. I perceived it as a dismissal.

Again, if you say you hadn't realized he was a lifer at that point then it is taken in a different light than how it came across.

[Requiem]

I said that was pretty ****ty for him to try to make it a pissing contest but you can't disregard his 17 years of service (you commented above that you didn't notice he had been in all his life so maybe the comment was from beforehand) and came across as asking what else he had done. I perceived it as a dismissal.

Again, if you say you hadn't realized he was a lifer at that point then it is taken in a different light than how it came across.

No, I had no idea he was a lifer. I kind of assumed based on his actions that he was a lifer -- and there is nothing wrong with that. After school I tried to go 35P in the Army, but medically I could not be cleared. So lets just clear up the "Req's a military hating poopface" thoughts before they get typed out. I would have been honored to serve in that capacity, just wasn't able. Sucked bad.

[alkemical]

Requiem and Ant are both over the line in this thread. Req tried to throw out LABF's service record to make Ant look stupid so Ant is now trying to do the "well I have more" to win. Military records shouldn't be used as badges and anyone doing so should be ashamed. I've known people who did more in two years than my dad did in 28 but both should absolutely be proud of their service.

Don't ruin it for plotiticians.

[ant1999e]

The service member in question publicly trashed the Commander in Chief on Facebook, and I'm the one making the "pointless attack?"

Shoot the messenger much?

And how is it that you've spent 17 years in the service and still don't know that what the guy did was a no-no?




I understand it's a "no, no". He's an idiot for doing it. It still had nothing to do with the thread.

[ant1999e]

Exactly.

His behavior leads me to believe he's never been in any sort of combat situation, police action, etc.

Otherwise, he'd realize some vets don't like to talk about their experiences.

I never asked you to tell me old war stories. Just asked how long. Simple question.

[ant1999e]

No, it is completely relevant one based on how he is going about his business with L.A.

Someone sure is protective of LABF. :kiss:
And how I'm going about my business with LABF? Broncosrule called me out saying LABF had served and asked if I had. I answered his question and out of sincere curiosity asked how long LABF had served for since I had not know he had. Then LABF goes on the attack accusing me of swiftboat attacking. **** me for being curious and surprised.
So if anyones handling of his "business" should be questioned it's LABF's for going deep on to the defensive and attacking me for asking a honest question. So yes, I attacked back if asking a question is attacking. It's obvious that LABF doesn't want to discuss the length of his service for reasons I don't know. Like I said in a previous post, regardless of how long you serve in the military it's something to be proud of (see my response to Roh in post #36).

[Requiem]

He doesn't have to justify or prove anything to you. That is the reason. End of argument.

[ant1999e]

He doesn't have to justify or prove anything to you. That is the reason. End of argument.

Well I sure am glad you took the time to clear that up.Uhh

And I told him that a few times but for some reason you felt the need to play Captain Save A ho and start running your mouth. Like I said, you should have kept you mouth shut and minded your own business.

[Requiem]

Well I sure am glad you took the time to clear that up.Uhh

And I told him that a few times but for some reason you felt the need to play Captain Save A ho and start running your mouth. Like I said, you should have kept you mouth shut and minded your own business.

You could use a couple of new one liners. Trying to impersonate Stone Cold Steve Austin isn't working out for you well.

[ant1999e]

You could use a couple of new one liners. Trying to impersonate Stone Cold Steve Austin isn't working out for you well.

Quality post if you were shooting for fail.

[Requiem]

Quality post if you were shooting for fail.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DVmkqk7uYeM/SXI7FADKJ5I/AAAAAAAAASw/X1ogjSLlKJ0/s320/gtfo_barker.jpg

[ant1999e]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_DVmkqk7uYeM/SXI7FADKJ5I/AAAAAAAAASw/X1ogjSLlKJ0/s320/gtfo_barker.jpg

And then you try to impersonate Bob Barker? Don't you have some weed to go smoke?

[Requiem]

And then you try to impersonate Bob Barker? Don't you have some weed to go smoke?

No, I posted a picture of Bob Barker. I did not impersonate him.

I'm sure I do, but I kind of like talking to a 17 year programmed human.

[ant1999e]

No, I posted a picture of Bob Barker. I did not impersonate him.

I'm sure I do, but I kind of like talking to a 17 year programmed human.

Ha, so because I've been in the military for 17 years I'm programmed? You disgrace yourself and disappoint your grandfather with every bit of trash that comes out of your mouth.
So much for this bullshyt filled post:
No, I had no idea he was a lifer. I kind of assumed based on his actions that he was a lifer -- and there is nothing wrong with that. After school I tried to go 35P in the Army, but medically I could not be cleared. So lets just clear up the "Req's a military hating poopface" thoughts before they get typed out. I would have been honored to serve in that capacity, just wasn't able. Sucked bad.

Maybe you have hard feelings?

[Requiem]

Ha, so because I've been in the military for 17 years I'm programmed? You disgrace yourself and disappoint your grandfather with every bit of trash that comes out of your mouth.

You are thirty five years old and still act like a 16 year old bully in high school on the internet. You are definitely passive-aggressive and have maturity issues. You've known one thing for half of your life. You tell me about being programmed.

. . . and no and no on disgrace and disappointment.

Maybe you have hard feelings?

I'm upset I couldn't do it, but that's the past. I've enjoyed getting to move around and travel the last two years and don't regret what I've done at all. When you get out and do diverse things, you learn more things. I prefer my environment to be dynamic, not static like you.

[ant1999e]

I'm upset I couldn't do it, but that's the past. I've enjoyed getting to move around and travel the last two years and don't regret what I've done at all. When you get out and do diverse things, you learn more things. I prefer my environment to be dynamic, not static like you.

Yeah, the military is definitely static. I just sit here being programmed all day long. Riding shotgun in a convoy through hostile territory is definitely static. Flying into Iraq in a Blackhawk was so ho hum. And travel, never do it in the military. I've only been to: Arizona, Colorado, Texas, Florida, Pennsilvania, Virginia, Maryland, California, Nebraska, Kansas...
Overseas; United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Germany, Qatar.
If only dealing with people from all these places and experiencing their cultures was getting out and doing diverse things.
Again, disgrace and disappoint.

[That One Guy]

Ha, so because I've been in the military for 17 years I'm programmed? You disgrace yourself and disappoint your grandfather with every bit of trash that comes out of your mouth.
So much for this bullshyt filled post:


Maybe you have hard feelings?

Take the high road, let this stuff go.

[ant1999e]

You are thirty five years old and still act like a 16 year old bully in high school on the internet. You are definitely passive-aggressive and have maturity issues. You've known one thing for half of your life.

What's the difference in how I act and how you or LABF or 75% of the people here act? All with immaturity and narrow mindedness. I'm right and you're wrong, end of argument comments. Like it or not, we're all the same, although some worse than others, just on opposing sides. So drop the holier than thou act and finger pointing.

[ant1999e]

Take the high road, let this stuff go.

You're right. I'm tired of the merry go round arguing anyway.
But I am so close to 5K posts.:wiggle:

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Someone sure is protective of LABF. :kiss:
And how I'm going about my business with LABF? Broncosrule called me out saying LABF had served and asked if I had. I answered his question and out of sincere curiosity asked how long LABF had served for since I had not know he had. Then LABF goes on the attack accusing me of swiftboat attacking. **** me for being curious and surprised.


You have the sequence of events bass-ackwards.

First, you asked me "why do you hate the military?"

Then you asked about my service.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

It's obvious that LABF doesn't want to discuss the length of his service for reasons I don't know.

Why would I want to discuss such matters with some sandbagging a$$hole who's already convinced I "hate the military?"

Use your head! :wave:

[Requiem]

What's the difference in how I act and how you or LABF or 75% of the people here act? All with immaturity and narrow mindedness. I'm right and you're wrong, end of argument comments. Like mit or not, we're all the same, although some worse than others, just on opposing sides. So drop the holier than thou act and finger pointing.

A spade is a spade.

[ant1999e]

I'd love to stay and argue with you two but it's military programming time.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

When it comes to dedication to service and the military I disagree. Although I think its honorable that anyone serve for however long or little, dedication and connection to the military MAY not be as strong with someone who only served for a few years. And notice I said MAY not.
It's obvious you are not an officer. So what's your plan, get 20, start drawing your government money and move on to the private sector?

[ant1999e]

It's obvious you are not an officer. So what's your plan, get 20, start drawing your government money and move on to the private sector?

The same thing most enlisted do after retirement, take my small retirement pay and find another job to support my family. I always wanted to be a Wal-Mart greeter. :P

And I do realize you're taking a jab at me. But I'll answer the question because I am proud of my service and nothing you say can change that.

[ant1999e]

Funny how this thread is bringing out all these negative thoughts and perceptions some people have of our military.

[That One Guy]

Funny how this thread is bringing out all these negative thoughts and perceptions some people have of our military.

I think it's terrible how this thread would reflect on the military for those without experience who were reading it.

[ant1999e]

I think it's terrible how this thread would reflect on the military for those without experience who were reading it.

An honestly, I was just curious about LABF's service. I had no idea he had served and that is probably one of the few things we have in common. But that's what I should expect from the WPR.

[That One Guy]

An honestly, I was just curious about LABF's service. I had no idea he had served and that is probably one of the few things we have in common. But that's what I should expect from the WPR.

No doubt he's a bit more willing to throw out the military in a negative light than I would be but to each their own. Just in the way of the Mane, it became a no holds barred pissing contest which just reflected poorly on everyone. Beerslug then took the cake with his remarks there that didn't really even merit a response but, that's nothing new from him.

[Requiem]

Funny how this thread is bringing out all these negative thoughts and perceptions some people have of our military.

Such as?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

No doubt he's a bit more willing to throw out the military in a negative light than I would be but to each their own. Just in the way of the Mane, it became a no holds barred pissing contest which just reflected poorly on everyone. Beerslug then took the cake with his remarks there that didn't really even merit a response but, that's nothing new from him.

L0L! :laugh:

The deftness with which you jackals play "attack the messenger" never ceases to amaze me.

Some clown who's active duty military publicly bashes the Commander in Chief on FB, I post the story, and suddenly I'm the bad guy? Or, nuttier still, I "hate the military?"

Right-wingers are like common criminals: Expose their wrongdoing, and they will respond by attacking you.

[Bronco_Beerslug]

The same thing most enlisted do after retirement, take my small retirement pay and find another job to support my family. I always wanted to be a Wal-Mart greeter. :P

And I do realize you're taking a jab at me. But I'll answer the question because I am proud of my service and nothing you say can change that.

Not a jab at all. The military hasn't changed since I served, just wondering whether you were a lifer or not.

No doubt he's a bit more willing to throw out the military in a negative light than I would be but to each their own. Just in the way of the Mane, it became a no holds barred pissing contest which just reflected poorly on everyone. Beerslug then took the cake with his remarks there that didn't really even merit a response but, that's nothing new from him.If you have no idea of what you are talking about you probably shouldn't try "to talk about it".

[ant1999e]

Not a jab at all. The military hasn't changed since I served, just wondering whether you were a lifer or not.

17 years in, definitely gonna do 20 or more.

[That One Guy]

Not a jab at all. The military hasn't changed since I served, just wondering whether you were a lifer or not.

If you have no idea of what you are talking about you probably shouldn't try "to talk about it".

It was a f'ing jab if I've ever seen one. Nice try, though.

[That One Guy]

17 years in, definitely gonna do 20 or more.

I knew a guy that got out at over 16. Not one of those early retirements or anything... just got out. He always said it was a great decision. Foolish if you ask me...

[That One Guy]

L0L! :laugh:

The deftness with which you jackals play "attack the messenger" never ceases to amaze me.

Some clown who's active duty military publicly bashes the Commander in Chief on FB, I post the story, and suddenly I'm the bad guy? Or, nuttier still, I "hate the military?"

Right-wingers are like common criminals: Expose their wrongdoing, and they will respond by attacking you.

I'm not attacking you. I merely said you're more willing than I am. Objectiveness can be a good thing.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I'm not attacking you. I merely said you're more willing than I am. Objectiveness can be a good thing.

:bs:

You suggested that posting a the aforementioned story was equivalent to "a willingness to portray the military in a negative light" or some such BS.

Newsflash: The serviceman who, while on active duty, slammed the COC publicly on FB is the person who "portrayed the military in a negative light" - not me. (Unless you believe violating military code is perfectly acceptable.)

The idiocy of the right-wing "logic" that says "anything our troops do is OK, and anyone who mentions any wrongdoing by our troops must "hate the military," or something along those lines, is beyond belief. :crazy:

[ant1999e]

:bs:

You suggested that posting a the aforementioned story was equivalent to "a willingness to portray the military in a negative light" or some such BS.

Newsflash: The serviceman who, while on active duty, slammed the COC publicly on FB is the person who "portrayed the military in a negative light" - not me. (Unless you believe violating military code is perfectly acceptable.)

The idiocy of the right-wing "logic" that says "anything our troops do is OK, and anyone who mentions any wrongdoing by our troops must "hate the military," or something along those lines, is beyond belief. :crazy:

Everything you said is true but what relevance did it have to the thread? The only thing it did was bring help portray the military in a negative light and had no place in this thread.

[That One Guy]

:bs:

You suggested that posting a the aforementioned story was equivalent to "a willingness to portray the military in a negative light" or some such BS.

Newsflash: The serviceman who, while on active duty, slammed the COC publicly on FB is the person who "portrayed the military in a negative light" - not me. (Unless you believe violating military code is perfectly acceptable.)

The idiocy of the right-wing "logic" that says "anything our troops do is OK, and anyone who mentions any wrongdoing by our troops must "hate the military," or something along those lines, is beyond belief. :crazy:

How many people speak ill of Obama on a daily basis? You just happened to post a military person? His opinion is no more significant than anyone else's in the grand scheme.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

How many people speak ill of Obama on a daily basis? You just happened to post a military person? His opinion is no more significant than anyone else's in the grand scheme.

::)

Shows how clueless you are.

Speaking out publicly against the COC is a violation of military code (which has been the whole point all along.)

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Everything you said is true but what relevance did it have to the thread? The only thing it did was bring help portray the military in a negative light and had no place in this thread.

Wow - for a member of a party that constantly preaches about personal responsibility, you sure don't seem to have a clue about how to assign it.

It's not the reporting of the story that "portrays the military in a negative light" - it's the actions of the individual about whom the story was written.

Your attempts to flip the script by attacking the messenger make you come off like Tony Soprano or some other criminal thug.

Further, your argument that reporting the actions of one individual somehow reflects negatively on the armed services as a whole is just absurd on its face.

[UltimateHoboW/Shotgun]

Wow - for a member of a party that constantly preaches about personal responsibility, you sure don't seem to have a clue about how to assign it.

It's not the reporting of the story that "portrays the military in a negative light" - it's the actions of the individual about whom the story was written.

Your attempts to flip the script by attacking the messenger make you come off like Tony Soprano or some other criminal thug.
Further, your argument that reporting the actions of one individual somehow reflects negatively on the armed services as a whole is just absurd on its face.

http://www.antifeministtech.info/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/godzilla_facepalm.jpg

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

^

UltimateSpammer is the false equivalence champ.

[That One Guy]

::)

Shows how clueless you are.

Speaking out publicly against the COC is a violation of military code (which has been the whole point all along.)

Correct me if I'm wrong (sincerely, as I didn't know that was your specific position), but I thought those limits were just put on officers as they are directly appointed/promoted by the president so he's technically their boss? I've never heard that an enlisted person couldn't criticize the president.

[ant1999e]

Wow - for a member of a party that constantly preaches about personal responsibility, you sure don't seem to have a clue about how to assign it.

It's not the reporting of the story that "portrays the military in a negative light" - it's the actions of the individual about whom the story was written.

Your attempts to flip the script by attacking the messenger make you come off like Tony Soprano or some other criminal thug.

Further, your argument that reporting the actions of one individual somehow reflects negatively on the armed services as a whole is just absurd on its face.

What relevance did it have to the thread??? What value did it add? None. This guy was no doubt an idiot. What I attack is why you chose to post the story in this thread.
You stated that his actions reflect negatively on the armed services. So posting this story in a thread that had nothing to do with the story only spreads this negativity.

[ant1999e]

Correct me if I'm wrong (sincerely, as I didn't know that was your specific position), but I thought those limits were just put on officers as they are directly appointed/promoted by the president so he's technically their boss? I've never heard that an enlisted person couldn't criticize the president.

It was passed when Clinton was banging everyone in the White House.

[That One Guy]

It was passed when Clinton was banging everyone in the White House.

That enlisted couldn't criticize the pres? That was before my time but I've just never heard it.

[ant1999e]

That enlisted couldn't criticize the pres? That was before my time but I've just never heard it.

I remember getting a briefing and signing an agreement when Clinton was president. From what I've been reading, you may be correct.regarding the UCMJ and commissioned officers. However, if he shared his views as a representative of the military, he is wrong. Regardless, it's not smart to be so openly negative about your Commander in Chief.

[That One Guy]

I remember vertigo a briefing and signing an agreement when Clinton was president. From what I've been reading, you may be correct.regarding the UCMJ and commissioned officers. However, if he shared his views as a representative of the military, he is wrong. Regardless, it's not smart to be so openly negative about your Commander in Chief.

LOL

Gotta love cell phone autocorrects.

Very interesting. I got into a fight over disrespect during my time so I've mildly looked into it and it is kind of a hazy line. You can't challenge those who you directly report to or any of your command but anyone outside that command is pretty much fair game as long as you don't say it to them, I believe. I can't remember all the details now.

And for the record, mine wasn't disrespecting a person but I called an entire squadron a bunch of F ups that wasted and screwed up my intelligence and my comment accidentally made it into the regimental commander's briefing. They tried to equate it to insulting the squadron commander himself but it still had no meat because I didn't report to him. As was the case then and now, though, they'll try any sort of catch all to punish this guy.

Oh, and random thought.. what if you refused to sign a statement saying you wouldn't criticize the pres? That wouldn't qualify for any of the chapters as far as I'm aware. It couldn't be disciplinary...

[ant1999e]

LOL

Gotta love cell phone autocorrects.

Very interesting. I got into a fight over disrespect during my time so I've mildly looked into it and it is kind of a hazy line. You can't challenge those who you directly report to or any of your command but anyone outside that command is pretty much fair game as long as you don't say it to them, I believe. I can't remember all the details now.

And for the record, mine wasn't disrespecting a person but I called an entire squadron a bunch of F ups that wasted and screwed up my intelligence and my comment accidentally made it into the regimental commander's briefing. They tried to equate it to insulting the squadron commander himself but it still had no meat because I didn't report to him. As was the case then and now, though, they'll try any sort of catch all to punish this guy.

Oh, and random thought.. what if you refused to sign a statement saying you wouldn't criticize the pres? That wouldn't qualify for any of the chapters as far as I'm aware. It couldn't be disciplinary...

Yup, just noticed the.vertigo. I also have a.problem with the space and.the period being next to each other. Most of the time I go back and.erase.the extra periods. Talk about a PITA.
Most.of.the.time.you just.sign.what.you're.told.to. I'm sure.they could make.something stick if you refused. Either.that.of.make.life.suck.for.a.while.

[That One Guy]

Yup, just noticed the.vertigo. I also have a.problem with the space and.the period being next to each other. Most of the time I go back and.erase.the extra periods. Talk about a PITA.
Most.of.the.time.you just.sign.what.you're.told.to. I'm sure.they could make.something stick if you refused. Either.that.of.make.life.suck.for.a.while.

With most phones, you also get a double tap of the space as a period as well. They come out of nowhere for me sometimes and I also ignore them as well.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

What relevance did it have to the thread??? What value did it add? None. This guy was no doubt an idiot. What I attack is why you chose to post the story in this thread.


Nope.

First you attacked my patriotism.

Then, when confronted, you changed your tune to "well, the story is in the wrong thread."

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I remember getting a briefing and signing an agreement when Clinton was president. From what I've been reading, you may be correct.regarding the UCMJ and commissioned officers. However, if he shared his views as a representative of the military, he is wrong. Regardless, it's not smart to be so openly negative about your Commander in Chief.

Especially in a forum as public as Facebook.

[ant1999e]

Nope.

First you attacked my patriotism.

Then, when confronted, you changed your tune to "well, the story is in the wrong thread."

No, that was the point. Wrong thread, no other reason to post it there but for negativity thus why the hatred for the military question. Sorry I didn't spell it all out for you.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

No, that was the point. Wrong thread, no other reason to post it there but for negativity thus why the hatred for the military question. Sorry I didn't spell it all out for you.

Your "wrong thread" objection was your fall-back position.

Your initial position was "why do you hate the military?"

If your only objection to the post was that it was in the wrong thread, then your first response would have reflected this.

[ant1999e]

Your "wrong thread" objection was your fall-back position.

Your initial position was "why do you hate the military?"

If your only objection to the post was that it was in the wrong thread, then your first response would have reflected this.

Why else would you post a link that portrayed the military in a negative way in a thread where it didn't belong? To bash the military IMO. Can you explain a better reason or is that something you don't want to talk about as well?

[Requiem]

Yawn.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Why else would you post a link that portrayed the military in a negative way in a thread where it didn't belong? To bash the military IMO. Can you explain a better reason or is that something you don't want to talk about as well?

Now you're in full-on false equivalence mode.

The story doesn't "portray the military in a bad light" - it portrays the dipsh*t who is publicly trashing the COC in a bad light.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Quote of the Day

"Voting Republican because you think that's the solution to fix our economy is like allowing the person who burglarized your home to design your next security system."

[ant1999e]

Now you're in full-on false equivalence mode.

The story doesn't "portray the military in a bad light" - it portrays the dipsh*t who is publicly trashing the COC in a bad light.

Really because you said this...


Newsflash: The serviceman who, while on active duty, slammed the COC publicly on FB is the person who "portrayed the military in a negative light" - not me. (Unless you believe violating military code is perfectly acceptable.)


I was just agreeing with you. So by you posting this story in a thread that had nothing to do with it, what was your purpose??? IMO, helping to portray the military in a "negative light". Again, the story had nothing to do with the thread, NOTHING.
So, you tell me, what was your reason for posting a story that you admitted portrayed the military in a bad light in a thread that had nothing to do with it??? Why would a veteran want to post a story that he admitted portrayed the military in a bad light??? In a thread that had nothing to do with the story? That's what I want to know. It's a simple question. But then again, you don't like answering simple questions do you?

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

Really because you said this...



I was just agreeing with you. So by you posting this story in a thread that had nothing to do with it, what was your purpose??? IMO, helping to portray the military in a "negative light". Again, the story had nothing to do with the thread, NOTHING.
So, you tell me, what was your reason for posting a story that you admitted portrayed the military in a bad light in a thread that had nothing to do with it??? Why would a veteran want to post a story that he admitted portrayed the military in a bad light??? In a thread that had nothing to do with the story? That's what I want to know. It's a simple question. But then again, you don't like answering simple questions do you?

Looks like you believe if you repeat the same false equivalence over and over again it will somehow magically become valid.

One more time, slowly:

The story didn't portray "the military" in a bad light - it portrayed an individual serviceman in a bad light ( a fact which, in this case, is the natural consequence of that serviceman's actions.)

[ant1999e]

Looks like you believe if you repeat the same false equivalence over and over again it will somehow magically become valid.

One more time, slowly:

The story didn't portray "the military" in a bad light - it portrayed an individual serviceman in a bad light ( a fact which, in this case, is the natural consequence of that serviceman's actions.)

I like how you took out the quote of you admitting the story portrayed the military in a bad light. You said it yourself. It's on the internet forever...
Post #110


QUOTE=L.A. BRONCOS FAN;3554477]

You suggested that posting a the aforementioned story was equivalent to "a willingness to portray the military in a negative light" or some such BS.

Newsflash: The serviceman who, while on active duty, slammed the COC publicly on FB is the person who "portrayed the military in a negative light" - not me. (Unless you believe violating military code is perfectly acceptable.)
[/QUOTE]

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

I like how you took out the quote of you admitting the story portrayed the military in a bad light. You said it yourself. It's on the internet forever...
Post #110


QUOTE=L.A. BRONCOS FAN;3554477]

You suggested that posting a the aforementioned story was equivalent to "a willingness to portray the military in a negative light" or some such BS.

Newsflash: The serviceman who, while on active duty, slammed the COC publicly on FB is the person who "portrayed the military in a negative light" - not me. (Unless you believe violating military code is perfectly acceptable.)


Another false equivalence.

If you look at the quote you posted above, I didn't say the STORY portrayed the military in a negative light - I said the actions of the individual reflected negatively on the military.

I find it hard to believe you've spent 17 years in the service and don't understand that when you're wearing the uniform you're representing the U.S. Army (or whatever branch you are in) and the U.S. government.

Anticipated response: Another attempt to sell your invalid "the fact that it was in the wrong thread proves a desire to portray the military in a negative light" argument.

[ant1999e]

Such as?

Such as this guy. Hes got a real vendetta against the military. Maybe he tried to get in but was rejected, I don't know. He's been neg repping me constantly. Dude needs to get a life.

Getting guns and murdering civilians isn't really much to be proud of. Real world? You've been indoctrinated into the military. You don't know jack**** else. Baby killer. *spits on face*

Too stupid to go to school so you went into the military and it's all you've ever known. I'm sure killing people for a living makes you feel good.