Neah... I doubt very much that the majority of the republicans want a less harshly treatment of them whistleblowers.
Evidently, you overlooked Leonard Downie's statement: “The administration’s war on leaks and other efforts to control information are the most aggressive I’ve seen since the Nixon administration, when I was one of the editors involved in The Washington Post’s investigation of Watergate.” Worst since Nixon. While many Republicans would keel-haul Edward Snowden for releasing classified info to foreign governments, they can't even gain access to whistleblowers that Obama has kept from testifying. .
It only says something about the Nixon administration. I doubt very much that the republicans of today would protect such whistleblowers if they could. So no need to just blame Obama / the Obama administration.
The decline came in the past year, so besides Obama, what other administration did we have last year to blame it on? I was under the impression Our Glorious Messiah has been the prez for over a year now. - - - Updated - - - The decline came in the past year, so besides Obama, what other administration did we have last year to blame it on? I was under the impression Our Glorious Messiah has been the prez for over a year now.
Yeah, and that's a bad thing in case you didn't notice. There's nothing good about being compared to the only president in US history who resigned in disgrace. What does your strawman have to do with the Obama Administration's spying and harassment of the journalists at the AP, Fox, et al, that has led to the reduction of press freedom in the US? The RSF did that in its report, compadre. The DOJ doesn't work for Congress and Republicans - it works for Obama.
Here is the bottom line that everyone should recognize: The essence of the Liberal paradigm is this: Good intentions resulting in unforeseen and unwanted consequences. Take that to the bank.
This has got to be a new low in making excuses for Obama's destruction of the First Amendment. You've hit bottom, so break out the heavy excavation equipment.
No (*)(*)(*)(*). But I still doubt not that the Republicans would do the same thing... to even worse. Sounds like you pretend the entire spy thing was Obama's idea. It's not. He just happens to be the president who got busted.
I did not make an excuse. I'm just saying the Republicans aren't any better towards whistleblowers at the moment. So there is no need to just eyeball at Obama. Hardly any US representative seems to be willing to protect whistleblowers / the media.
This whole Rights issue has been blown way out of proportion. As well when the Republican's held the Presidency the Democrats were all over them decrying the erosion of Rights and Freedoms....when the Democrats held the Presidency as they do now...the Republicans decried the erosion of Rights and Freedoms. The REALITY is both major parties just LOVE to blame the other side but the reality is both Parties KNOW we need to have a certain degree of flexibility in order to protect the nation. AboveAlpha
How about this one: The essence of the Conservative paradigm is this: "I got mine, screw everyone else."
As someone who spends a lot of time abroad, I can safely say no foreigners think America is the "best" or most "free" country in this day and age
Not sure why you think they have good intentions. As can be seen they will never give you that grace, in fact im surprised you werent accused of having slaves in your garage.
That's an easy one: If you were to make a list of the various "Liberal" and "Conservative" policies, it quickly becomes clear that Liberal policies tend to be written for to improve the quality of life for the public while conservative policies are written to benefit groups that line the pockets of conservative politicians with campaign funds.
You've got to be kidding. The United States Constitution is very clear in prohibiting government from making any law respecting an establishment of religion, or impeding the free exercise of religion, and yet Republicans in Congress and states pass an inordinate number of laws founded completely on the Christian religion. In fact, in spite of the Constitution and several federal court rulings banning the practice, Republicans have illegally passed laws mandating the teaching of the bible as science in public schools using taxpayer dollars because they claim the creation myth is real and evolution is an abomination to biblical god. Are you equally critical of them?
lol right......... wheres Obama sending all that freshly printed money? Both parties are guilty of corporatism, id happily see that stamped that out. Id put a sliding scale tax on business and a low flat tax on wage earners which is where the 1% really generates their wealth, leftist are only interested in class warfare and attack the wage earner/ worker. Leftist (they arent liberals, that would infer liberty) policies dont improve quality of life they steal by force from one group to give to another. Where as the other will allow you to rise and fall on your own which is what true capitalism was built on which has improved the quality of life for people more than any other. I personally see one as more liberty, less govt, less taxes and more personal responsibility. Teach you to fish rather than teach you steal fish.
What are you talking about? Surely you are aware that there are companies who pay their "wage earners" so little that those "wage earners" are reliant on taxpayer-funded benefits just to survive, effectively forcing taxpayers to subsidize those companies while they rake in profits... The "Leftist" position of increasing the pay for those wage earners would cut the number of welfare recipients, which shrinks the role of government - but you want to call it "stealing by force from one group to give to another"...?
Companies pay the market rate. The leftist position is to flood in 3rd world low skilled labor which drives those wages down. Their min wage then prices low skilled people out of the market place where they become dependents to the state which means more leftist voters. It also removes the incentive to work with everything supplied free while simply voting for more. Where as i believe if you limit the supply of low skilled workers then the demand for low skilled workers rises. We know what happens then, when natural market forces do there thing - they get paid more. For some reason you guys think we're for the corporations and against the little guy. We dont want the endless supply of low skilled labor corporations and collectivists crave, we want to provide more opportunity for those willing to take it. For people to be able to help themselves, get work, build up skills and perhaps start their own business. Creating more competition, more innovation while creating more work opportunities for others.
If I were "low-skilled" labor and made minimum wage, I don't know if I could afford to cover basic needs like food, rent, clothes, bills, transport, etc - even if I were worked 40 hours - and I'd be terrified of getting sick. If one party told me that I was some sort of parasite for getting underpaid while my company raked in billions and the CEO took home more money than my entire community, and the same party kept cutting taxes for the CEO (so he can make more campaign contributions) while cutting any safety net that might help me survive... I think voting for the political party that's less likely to kill me would be an obvious decision that has more to do with a lack of reasonable alternatives. Sure, if there's a shortage of low-skilled workers... which would happen once there was zero unemployment and a crapload of mid-tier jobs for some of the front line workers to move into... None of which is facilitated by any conservative policy. If my parents had been of a low socio-economic demographic, I probably wouldn't have had much of an education. It's pretty likely that they would have needed me to contribute to the household income - possibly even prior to completion of high school. I certainly wouldn't have had as much time available to study beyond high school, or money to pay tuition... especially with conservatives making student loans unaffordable. So how, exactly, would I get the knowledge and finance to start a business?
But naturally. Creationism is not science, it has almost no place in the science class. Maybe it would be OK to mention it as background material, as part of the set of religions' creation stories, for comparison purposes. If Republicans do that (er, when) they are wrong and need to be called out and shut down. Absolutely.
