LOLWUT!

by Anonymous 9 years ago

This is horrible. I believe it though. Good ol' American government for you.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

No, they should get charged for both crimes

by Anonymous 9 years ago

But that is the point - our government no longer views the first offense as a "crime" - so any subsequent "crimes" are not crimes at all. How could they be? Obama just traded 5 Al Qaeda criminals being held at Guantanamo Bay for 1 American soldier being held for 5 years by the Taliban. He did not go through Congress to do so and violated our rule of law as to how he did it. Since he personally violates our laws when he chooses, it is no wonder that he rewards wrong doers. If you read my explanation you will see that he released over 30,000 illegals who were being detained and awaiting deportation. He has released other prisoners since being commander. He encourages law breakers but attacks and goes after law abiding citizens. Things are extremely upside down right now.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

I picture Obama grabbing the jail house keys, sneaking down to the dungeon and letting people out. Of course this is not the case. I agree with the crux of your argument that the administration has been interpreting its authority to broadly. As has every administration since Washington. I still oppose boarders I still oppose criminal court systems I would have done the same thing (let them all go) but... I (even more strongly) oppose any government official who acts without consent of the people (or in the bizarre set-up we have in USA - the consent of congress). That is why I support many of the things Obama has done, because I feel he did them well within the confines of the rules of government. I oppose many things being done during his administration that are not being done within the framework of the current legal process. Over all it seems the current administration is now pretty much on //par// with what the previous five or six administrations had done, they all infamously assume powers not given to them by the people. Kennedy did it, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II, and Obama. I cannot think of any examples of Carter seriously overstepping his authority but I am sure he must have. It is the nature of leadership and is one reason I support anarchy.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

So you have no problem with the "trade" that just occurred - 1 POW for 5 terrorists? And without notifying Congress 30 days in advance or giving any reasons why or stipulations/conditions of the trade? Is this not a clear act of negotiating with terrorists? And please tell me that this does not show that he is acting on his own just as a king or dictator would. If this is the "new" America, then we are completely and thoroughly screwed.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

Nope. As I just said: I do not approve of officials overstepping their authority so, no, I will not defend his actions on that level. I also said I would have approved of the trade if I were asked. I was not asked, and I (or my representatives) should have been asked. In fact I would let every prisoner in the world free if it were up to me. I do not believe in crime or punishment. Good thing for you it is not up to me, because you would probably have a shit if I did that.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

If you let them all go (as being up to you), then I would make sure to defend myself and weed a few of them out (as being up to me). And since you don't believe in crime or punishment, then what do you propose happen to those who ruthlessly abuse the rest of humanity? Give them gold stars and have a stern talk with them? Put them in charge of the rest of us? I find it extremely difficult to believe that you see no need for accountability, discipline, or punishment. Did your children EVER do wrong or get punished in any way whatsover? Were there absolutely NO rules, guidelines, or boundaries that they could not cross? I recall one time you saying that you had no television or video games while they were growing up (correct me if wrong). Why? You made that call for and on their behalf. They did not choose that for themselves (maybe later on), but initially you chose that for them as something they could not do. Were they allowed to smoke, drink, swear, lie, cheat, steal, gamble, or tell you how and what they were going to do? Also, at some point in our discussions if you don't mind, I would like to hear about the kind of childhood you yourself had. If you don't feel comfortable sharing that, it is fine.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

As I have said before I do not oppose rules or laws. I don't believe they are "necessary" I admit they can be useful for setting up conventions and assisting in the formation of societies, I think they arise naturally and are followed naturally. We do not need to appoint //special people// to write laws or to enforce them, or to punish people for breaking them. As I said they will arise naturally without a government or a church to make them up or enforce them. Laws arise naturally. Breaking laws is not a "crime" and punishing others for breaking laws is unnecessary. So feel free to take out as many as you want to, I do not judge you either, in fact that is the premise of my assertion that we do not need to appoint a judge an jury, folks like you are happy to do it without being "assigned" the job. There are plenty of people willing to judge others and punish them often in the name of their god or country. I personally don't dole out punishments because I am not perfect and so I choose not to "cast stones" at others. And no. So far my kids have never done anything wrong. Of course they could not, as there is no "right" or "wrong", it is what it is - even the stoning part. If you will check my other post I did not condemn the stoning, just asked for assistance in understanding the mindset that claims a "god" wants us to be mean to each other.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

But we both know that if I take some of them out, man's laws considers that vigilantism and I would then become the bad guy. Our system somehow has come to pervert our need to protect and arm ourselves in to protecting the actual villains and using the laws to hold down and thwart those who would be law abiding citizens. God established laws from day 1 and is a God of retribution. For every action there is a consequence. Eat from the tree that was specifically stated not to, and a direct violation against God occurred. The Fall of Mankind did not have to occur, but unfortunately did. If you are familiar with Genesis, then you know that a curse was placed upon all of humanity from that day forward. Since you claim there is no god, then in spite of what others believe or don't believe, it can not be any god who/that is responsible for ANY of man's evil. If gods do not exist, then it would be impossible for them to sway or compel humans to act or perform against their wills. And not to slight your children in any way, shape, or form - but are you seriously and with a straight face and good conscience actually going to make the claim that they have "NEVER done anything wrong?" If that is true, then they are perfect - something not even you claim to be.

by Anonymous 9 years ago

That's like ask me if my children have ever ridden on a real unicorn or danced with a fairy. Of course not, they don't exist. People who believe that there is a god who judges their actions and divides those acts into two buckets, good and bad - well I don't get it and I never will. I am not perfect, neither am I imperfect, I am nothing. Not to get all "Clinton-y" here but //define 'wrong'//. I am using "wrong" to mean "evil", so no, they have never done anything evil. They have done things they wished they hadn't, they have tried things that did not work. They have experienced failures and disappointments, and they made bad decision. But it was never "wrong" it just 'was' what it 'was.' They learned, they grew, they became better and stronger and wiser. But no, neither they, nor I, nor you, nor anyone else has ever done anything "wrong" - because there is no god to define "good" and likewise there is no devil to define "evil". There is no "right" and there is no "wrong". I don't understand people who see things as black or white, people who make distinctions, **it is all one** If there is good then it is evil, if there is right then it is wrong, if there is you then you are me and we are all together GOO GOO G’JOOB!

by Anonymous 9 years ago

We will definitely agree to disagree on this one. I don't want to preach to you or take you to task on every single point of belief. If you are happy and satisfied with your approach to life, then I am happy for you. I do not need to convince you to see it my way.

by Anonymous 9 years ago