Re: Anyone using perimiter fence protection

[JoeRaisin <joeraisin2001@xxxxxxxxx>]

Robert L Bass wrote:
> "JoeRaisin" wrote:
>>
>> Oh Please!
>>
>> They both handled the military in the same way.
>
> Uh, no.  Obama never put our troops in harm's way based on a pack of
> lies. Obama is trying to undo the terrible damage that Bush did to our
> military personnel.  For example, Bush left thousands of Iraq veterans
> without needed medical help.  Obama won't do that.  Unlike Bush, he
> actually cares about the men and women in uniform.
>

Is that why it was briefly proposed that they bear their own financial
burdens in caring for service related disabilities?  Let me guess, you
never heard that one, right?  They floated it out there for a few days
until they figured out it was political suicide.

>> They gave guidance and let the onsite commander make the calls.
>
> Bush never gave guidance.  He just sent them in without a plan.
>
>> Are you trying to say that Obama has not broken any promises?
>
> He's a politician, so no.
>
>> Are you happy with his cabinet appointments?
>
> So far, so good.
>
>> Did you hear that the IRS (under the dubious leadership of a tax
>> cheat)...
>
> That's a pretty strong choice of words.  As I understand it, there was
> an error in his reporting which he admitted when his accountants
> discovered it. He paid the IRS in full, including interest and penalties.
>

Okay, he said he used Turbo Tax and that it never prompted him on the
omitted data.  The makers of Turbo Tax released a statement that it most
definitely would have done so.  So he either lied or he is a moron who
couldn't follow a simple program.

The IMF said they gave him the money to pay the taxes.  Now, he must
have noticed the extra coin in his bank account (unless of course the
moron label applies).  Well, that and the document he signed saying he
understood the tax issues.  So, again, he is either stupid, dishonest or
both.

He didn't pay penalties.  Furthermore he didn't pay 2001 and 2002 until
AFTER he was appointed and it became an issue.

I don't see a problem with my choice of words.

> I noticed that one (SC I think) senator tried to hold up the appointment
> of a bona fide war hero who lost both her legs when her helicopter was
> shot down over Iraq from appointment to the VA.  This is a woman who is
> revered by veterans of all parties but a Republican senator held up her
> appointment for weeks without cause.
>

Could it be he didn't agree with her point of view?  Could it be he
didn't agree with the appointment?

Perhaps he, like most politicians, is a partisan, petulant child and was
remembering all the appointments the democrats held up for purely
partisan reasons.

>> How about some of the things he has talked about or others of his ilk
>> have proposed in legislation?
>> Firearms licenses (with intrusive applications)...
>
> Obama never proposed that.
>

Thus the phrase, "others of his ilk" though how could it be that such an
intelligent and on the ball president wouldn't know what nefarious
agenda the other members of his party are up to.

>> centrally monitored/controlled thermostats...
>
> That's not even physically possible using current technology.
>

http://www.engadget.com/2008/01/13/home-thermostats-big-brothers-next-target/

>> centralized database of health records
>
> Great idea.
>

So much for HIPA

>> elimination of the secret ballot.
>
> No such law is proposed.
>
Card Check...

>> Yeah... that's what we need.
>
> Just what the doctor ordered.
>
>> We have merely traded in the Bushwaffen for the Obamastasi.
>
> I'm unsure what either of those terms means.

Well... Bushwaffen was a term your folks (anti-Bush) coined in order to
in some way associate him with Hitler and/or the Nazi regime.  Of course
you knew that but now that the shoe is on the other foot you are going
to try and make it appear that such games are silly - which of course
they are.

> It appears that Obama,
> unlike Bush, actually cares about America and Americans.  Is he
> perfect?  No chance. Will he make mistakes?  Sure.  The difference is
> he's basically an honest person (to the degree that one can expect from
> a politician).  Bush is a liar who slew thousands of American troops on
> the altar of his own ego.  Obama is brilliant, yet humble whereas Bush
> was stupid, yet arrogant.
>
>> They are both (along with their parties) dedicated to the
>> centralization of power in DC which flies in the face of the tenth
>> amendment.
>
> I'm in favor of centralizing power in Sarasota.
>
>> Now we have the situation were, while it is a terrible thing to
>> profile mullahs who purposely act provocative in an airport, We have
>> to keep a close eye on the conservative guy who made it back from Iraq
>> and now wants nothing more than to provide for his family by the sweat
>> of his brow and would like to keep just a little bit of the fruits of
>> his labor...
>
> Those guys, American heros, were abandoned by Bush and just about every
> previous administration.  Obama is finally trying to do something to
> help them out.
>

Oh, you mean by warning local law enforcement that folks like that are
likely to become domestic terrorists.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/14/homeland-security-report_n_186834.html



>> Oh yeah, and, horror of horrors - he goes to church...
>
> So do I.  That doesn't get me anything special in this life -- only in
> the next.
>