12 Oct 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterReally? So if a President decides to lead the country down a horrible path it would behoove all former president's to shut up?
You've been sniffing too many of Carter's farts, because former presidents are not supposed to speak publicly about the decisions that acting presidents make.
I wonder if you would be saying that if a future US president were to lead the country down the same path as Hitler.
There is no rule. There may be some sort of ridiculous code of post-Presidents... and I imagine there are times to break it.
13 Oct 08
1 edit
In September, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce warned citizens that they would bring criminal libel prosecutions against anyone who made statements against Obama that were "false."
Wow. Obama's such a prick! How dare he! Anyone should be able to publicly lie about him without penalty, right? I mean, just because it's illegal doesn't mean it should be stopped!
14 Oct 08
Originally posted by AThousandYoungHow is Obama the prick in this? It seems to me those 2 Attorneys are the pricks. If Obama is proven to be supporting this, then he certainly is a prick. But I don't see anything proving this.
In September, St. Louis County Circuit Attorney Bob McCulloch and St. Louis City Circuit Attorney Jennifer Joyce warned citizens that they would bring criminal libel prosecutions against anyone who made statements against Obama that were "false."
Wow. Obama's such a prick! How dare he! Anyone should be able to publicly lie about him withou ...[text shortened]... penalty, right? I mean, just because it's illegal doesn't mean it should be stopped!
14 Oct 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterMan, I've been on this forum a while now, and I KNOW you know better than that!🙂 There is no such "rule" or "law"; now, you may THINK that it's some sort of unwritten gentleman's agreement...but you'd be wrong there, too. All the way back to Adams and Jefferson, they've been badmouthing each other, in and out of office.
You've been sniffing too many of Carter's farts, because former presidents are not supposed to speak publicly about the decisions that acting presidents make.
14 Oct 08
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterJust because Republican Presidents are too selfish to do anything meaningful after they leave office, does not mean that you are not supposed to be a good person and fight for what you think is right.
You've been sniffing too many of Carter's farts, because former presidents are not supposed to speak publicly about the decisions that acting presidents make.
Besides, we keep spending our tax dollars on their secret service protection, so they ought to do SOMETHING to make themselves useful. In fact, Carter should be lambasted for taking the low hanging fruit of criticizing W's idiocy.
14 Oct 08
Originally posted by kirksey957This is just tooo funny I almost blew coffeee out of my nose, let me get this straight.
Here's a double standard I observed today on your ass-licking network known as Fox News. Neil Cuvuto asked Dennis Kucinich "How dare Jimmy Carter criticize President Bush! What gives him the right to Criicize President Bush...on foreign soil, I might add?"
I think it's something called "free speech."
JIMMY CARTER said President BUSH is a bad president. Doesn't anyone else find the humor in that?
14 Oct 08
1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterOn the contrary, I happen to have the strong impression that the thugocracy has fallen with this huge thug-induced financial crisis on our hands. The thugs and their corrupt greedy allies on Wallstreet are licking their wounds or will simply be forced to pack their bags ..... forced by the people ..... good riddens !
The Coming Thugocracy .....
16 Oct 08
Originally posted by torch71I get it. But the point was about freedom of speech--not the stupidity of that speech.
This is just tooo funny I almost blew coffeee out of my nose, let me get this straight.
JIMMY CARTER said President BUSH is a bad president. Doesn't anyone else find the humor in that?
16 Oct 08
Originally posted by ale1552I'm all for criticizing Republicans on foreign soil where it's warranted -- other democratic countries need to be informed of the lies, deceit, smear campaigning, fearmongering and manipulation that the Republicans use to trick the American people into voting for them.
Neil Cavuto agreed that Carter had the right to criticize Bush...the thing he objected to was that he did it ON FOREIGN SOIL.
I wouldn't go to Iran or Afghanistan and criticize a Republican president, but if we're talking about other democratic countries then I think it's a good thing to do.
16 Oct 08
Originally posted by torch71Jimmy Carter was an infinitely better president than Bush; he's way above Bush's league, and he's way above Reagan's league. It's a huge shame that too many voters were too ignorant to see that at the time of the 1980 election, and the country has paid a huge price for that mistake -- including a national debt that's just passed $10 trillion thanks largely to Reagan/Bush era neocon Republicans.
This is just tooo funny I almost blew coffeee out of my nose, let me get this straight.
JIMMY CARTER said President BUSH is a bad president. Doesn't anyone else find the humor in that?
16 Oct 08
Originally posted by MrHandThis "low-hanging fruit" point of yours is a good one. Bush makes an easy target for the Dems to run against this year, but they've been too scared to run against the real root causes of this country's problems: like Reagan and the military-industrial complex. Ever since people didn't listen to Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale, Democrats have been too scared to run against the real culprit: Ronald Reagan.
Just because Republican Presidents are too selfish to do anything meaningful after they leave office, does not mean that you are not supposed to be a good person and fight for what you think is right.
Besides, we keep spending our tax dollars on their secret service protection, so they ought to do SOMETHING to make themselves useful. In fact, Carter should be lambasted for taking the low hanging fruit of criticizing W's idiocy.
Libertarian-leaning candidates like Ron Paul, Chuck Baldwin and Bob Barr seem to be too scared to run against Reagan, too. They keep praising him for "small government" yet in actuality he was a neocon hack and lying con artist who greatly increased the national debt, government expenditure and the size of the federal government.
Also, isn't it ironic that the Republicans feel very confident about running against a makebelieve "liberal media", yet the mainstream Democrat candidates are too scared to run against a very real military-industrial complex?
16 Oct 08
Originally posted by no1marauderNice article! Thanks for the link.
Where does it say that in the US Constitution? I'm sure you had no objection to this: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0CE5DF1630F935A25756C0A965958260
"He [Reagan] said that work on his plan to put anti-missile weapons in space helped win the cold war..."
Lying SOB! Listen to that exceptionally talented *actor* jump credit for winning the Cold War, which had virtually nothing to do with him!
What's more, listen to Reagan call for neoconservative military spending to be continued AFTER the Cold War was clearly over! Remember whose fault it is that the country's national debt has just passed $10 trillion!