Bachmann to Beck: We‘re Facing a ’New Axis of Evil’
- Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:35pm by
Tiffany Gabbay
- Print »
- Email »
Scroll down for video
During Tuesday’s broadcast of the Glenn Beck Program, Glenn interviewed GOP presidential contender Michele Bachmann, asking the Minnesota congresswoman a myriad questions on topics ranging from foreign and domestic policy to the economy and crisis preparedness. At one point, Bachmann spoke about the dangers of “the new axis of evil” comprising Iran, Syria, North Korea, China and Russia.
Both Glenn and Bachmann pointed out Russia‘s role in aiding some of the world’s most notorious aggressors and state sponsors of terror — from providing Russian chemists and engineers to aid Iran in its development of nuclear weapons to sending Russian warships to aid the Syrians in their defense.
“The UN has reported that 250 children were tortured and killed and Russia sends warships to Syria to defend Syria,” Glenn stated in disbelief.
Bachmann later noted that it was Senator John McCain, rather than former President George W. Bush, who got it right when looking into Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s eyes. McCain, according to Bachmann, saw “KGB,“ not a ”soul,” noting that the former Republican presidential nominee may have been more accurate than Bush in his assessment of the Russian PM.
As the conversation progressed to acts of agression committed around the world, Glenn expressed concern over the well-being of the U.S. military abroad, citing the recent Iranian ransacking of the British embassy in Tehran as an example.
In response, Bachmann said the British embassy raid was orchestrated by the Iranian regime in defiance of recent sanctions. She then questioned “why the Brits would even have an Embassy in Iran anyway?”
“It [Iran] is a state sponsor of terror,” Bachmann said, before suggesting the British might want to consider removing their embassy from such hostile territory.
“Wouldn’t they [the Iranians] feel like they then won?” Glenn asked.
Bachmann said that, rather than it being construed as a retreat, the British could just “fall back” in order to regroup. But she stressed that these were merely her opinions and that it is up to the U.K. to decide best how to handle its own affairs.
Prior to discussing foreign policy and the emergence of a new axis of evil, Bachmann also spoke about how Americans can prepare for potentially “very difficult” times ahead. Citing the ripple effects — namely a recession — America will feel as a result of a European Union collapse, Bachmann expressed disappointment in the fact that “we are hearing more about the Kardashian wedding” than the impending economic implosion of the EU and subsequent U.S. risk.
While Bachmann acknowledged that the U.S. stands to lose $50-60 billion, it will be U.S. companies overseas that will be the hardest hit in such a collapse.
Glenn also pointed out that the U.S. comprises nearly 27 percent of the International Monetary Fund, and because of that will be forced to bail Europe out.
“I wouldn’t,” Bachmann began. “I wouldn’t put U.S. taxpayer exposure at risk.”
Bachmann asserted that the world’s financial resources are either sitting in China, or held by Saudi Arabian sheiks and Russian oligarchs.
“We‘re broke but we act like we’re still on top of the world,” Bachmann said.
“For the first time we’re making decisions that a Banana Republic would make,“ not those ”a first class nation” would make.
With growing financial burdens and worldwide turmoil bearing down on the U.S., Glenn then turned his focus to emergency preparedness.
“What would you say to the American people about preparing their own house?” Glenn asked Bachmann.
“I would tell them that EU economic collapse could mean U.S. recession,” Bachmann started, qualifying that she would “urge people to not give into that form of panic but think about their own resources” like food, water, and the basics needed for survival.
Bachmann noted that every home in Switzerland is required to have a bomb shelter, food, water and a firearm, suggesting the European country is a potential model for the U.S..
Bachmann urged that Americans “just need to take precautions” in the event of a military or economic “disruption,” however unlikely that may seem, and asked people to consider supplying themselves with what they would need to survive a 7 to 30 day period.
Bachmann also explored the issue of potentially abolishing the Fed, or at least “taking them down from the mighty perch they are on.”
Below is the first segment of Glenn’s fascinating interview with Bachmann. Watch below — the “new axis of evil” comment comes around 12:30…but you might want to start listening around 11:55:
Popular Stories
MSNBC Host Snaps in Heated Segment: ‘What in the World Is Riskier Than Being a Poor Person in America?’ 690 Comments
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 659 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 524 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 362 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 327 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 211 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 227 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
- President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order Read More
- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 211 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (500)
Crakaveli
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:13pmShe should scare the hell out of any rational person.
A Conservatarian
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:18pmYou knocked that one outta the park Craka!
Report Post »broker0101
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:23pmIf Michelle Bachmann scares you, your level of cowardice speaks for itself. Not to worry though, cowardice a universal trait of the Left.
Report Post »Cold War Vet
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:41pm@ BROKER0101
Absolutely correct!
Report Post »RJO
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:05amUh…right. You must have been Captain of the high school debate team…right? Throw a verbal bomb and run. YOU scare the hell out of me in that you have no clue as to what this country is up against – both foreign and domestic. Yes – the founding fathers warned of threats – both foreign and DOMESTIC.
If you have doubts about that – you’re either a disguised progressive troller or your as informed as a doorknob.
Wake up idiot!
Report Post »Susanna
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:10amIs it just me, or is anyone else having trouble with the volume coming from GBTV? I hear everything else on my computer loud and clear, but GBTV is so low I strain to hear it.
Report Post »SHOWMESTATEGUY
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:14amCRAK—————–
Make fun of her if you wish. However, the rational people are always the first to die. Ask any Jew that was in Germany in the 1930′s, (hitler didn’t really mean all those things he said in his speeches). The rational ones stayed put and the irrational ones got out of Germany.. Who lived and who died?
My point is she is expressing the fact that major trouble is coming to the world if changes are not made. You may think otherwise, your right to do so, but don’t be one of the ones that were so rational that you died trying.
Report Post »endgamer
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:33am@Susanna, Yes Volume problems and I wrote customer service. There IS NO customer service at GBTV. Glenn NEVER returns emails other than auto responders. Stu and AskRAJ NOTHING!!
Glen did say that his didn’t give a crap whether we tuned in or not so.. I guess this is a hint! They’re not going to fix it so go away.. I might take him up on that offer..
Susanna
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:40amEndgamer, I agree. I have written to Raj and CS and no response. I can‘t justify paying for something I can’t hear. And even on this website, I can’t respond directly to you, I can only “reply” to the first post on here.
Report Post »Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:52amre: she should scare the h… out of….
Report Post »****
Or the rationality into any insane one!!!!
TH30PH1LUS
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:08am@ Crakaveli
Why are you scared of her? Because she has faith in Jesus Christ?
I’m assuming that you would also be “scared” of Isaac Newton, Galileo, Louis Pasteur, Christopher Columbus, George Washington, Noah Webster, and basically every major player in modern science, modern medicine, and Western Civilization – and label them all as “irrational” because they also believed as she does.
Report Post »Conservative_T-Rex
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:14amI’m rational and yet I am not scared of her. Hmmmmmm, how could that be? I love how easy it is to prove liberals’ theories wrong.
Report Post »Diggyme
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:40amHopefully she will scare anyone with “Hell” inside of them…it would actually be nice to get some of that “Hell” out of people…she is rational and that does scare the irrational.
Report Post »DonaldH
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 5:04amOh yea,, scaaaaaarrrry!!! and she must be insane for complaining the media is covering the Kim Kardashians marriage and divorce more than they are to how close the EU is to defaulting…. OOOooo spooky broad….
Report Post »West Coast Patriot
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 5:26amF F, You think Romney did good in Bretts interview?? He is trying to hide behind his book on flip flopping answers. I think I could write a book and then when some things were brought out in my past, I could say, oh that is not accurate (a political term, kinda like “I did not have sexual relations…”), just read my book and you will understand all about me. Horse pucky! He will continue to tell you what you want to hear to get you to vote for him. I mean, look at this answer:
“Well, Bret, your list is just not accurate,” Romney said. “So, one, we’re going to have to be better informed about my views on issues. My view is you can look at what I’ve written in my book [“No Apology”]. You can look at a person who has devoted his life to his family, to his faith, to his country. And I’m running for president because of the things I believe I think I can do to help this country.”
That is a typical politician answer through and through. He is not fooling me and I am sorry that he continues to fool you, but, qua sera sera. I am looking for a person who is honest when he speaks, believes in the Constitution and Individual Liberty and has devoted his life to fighting for those two most important things that comes with our Freedom. Do what you may do but for me, as Patrick Henry said; “Give me Liberty or give me Death”
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 7:35amSo, let me get this straight. She wants a smaller federal government but she also wants it to be required that everyone own a gun, have a fallout shelter, and have a supply of food rations. So she’s against big government but also for it. She’s against the government telling you what to do, except that she’s also for it. Hmmm, seems like Michele is having a difficult time making her mind up on this one.
Report Post »Infadelicious
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 7:38amnot a reply to anyone. just a cry for help! I have asked for customer service from CS from Natasha from Jeffy . after my pymt for GBTV came out Nov 17 I have been unable to access anything on the website. I have phoned and emailed and been “accelerated” twice. no one has gotten back to me. Glenn , maybe put the next book on hold and fine tune customer service on your existing products. sorry, but I am not the only one and we‘re gettin’ a little pissy out here without.GBTV and Jeffy on the Feed. Loved the email for cyber MOnday. why would I buy that when I can’t get the tv show anyway? (eyeroll). please help, or what else can I do but cancel to get $$$$ back.
Report Post »Stuck_in_CA
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 7:42am@broker0101…Well said! Bachmann is an honorable woman. These days, honor is in short supply in DC — and with some trolls that post here.
Report Post »As for candidate choices, IMO, we need to look at them all objectively:
http://caucuses.desmoinesregister.com/candidates/buddy-roemer/
He seems to be on solid footing, on the issues.
Shiroi Raion
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:05amI decided to vote for her in the primaries after The Blaze posted this article:
Report Post »http://www.theblaze.com/stories/so-where-do-the-gop-presidential-candidates-stand-on-abortion-immigration-terrorism/
I agree with her on all the important issues. The gay marriage issue… Don‘t care and I have no opinion as long as the government doesn’t interfere with the churches.
Whether or not other people think she can win or not… Don‘t care and I’m going to vote for the person I believe is best for America, Michelle. Character matters.
spfoam1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:07amLefties are afraid of almost anything, and that explains thier desire for a big brother (communist government) to hold thier hands and wipe the drool off thier chins.
Report Post »Southernsoul
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:12amIf by ‘rational’ you mean someone who has their head up their butt and absolutely no clue as to what is actually going on in this world, you’re right, she would be scary. If you are accustomed to living in a candy-coated world the truth can be quite shocking.
Report Post »mils
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:19amWe are in the trouble we are in…because of people like you
Report Post »Face the facts…we are no longer the dominate nation, nations laugh at us, nations no longer want to be us…All because of POLITICS
All because Americans do not pay attention to things that are going on …and when the sky starts to fall…it’s “whhhhhhhyy???”
jakartaman
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:39amLiberals are not rational
Report Post »bhohater
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:43amShe is not only the most conservative candidate, but the only one who will tell us the truth about how precarious our situation really is. What she is trying to tell us is that our economy is about to collapse and to get prepared. She should be our next President.
Report Post »FoxholeAtheist
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:15amHow convenient. She’s finally managed to roll Atheists, Muslims, and Commies into one giant boogyman.
constitutionaldirective
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:26amYES!!! Bachman HAS been known to scare BOTH Statists and Commie alike.. Commie-veli.. ;)
rational or not..
TYRANTS and their USEFUL IDIOTS deeply dread harbingers of Liberty!
I can SMELL your fear TOO!
Report Post »escape_from_socialism
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:39amI admire Michelle Bachmann for her courage, but have to be honest, last night interview was painful to watch.
Report Post »KTsayz
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:56amNew ‘axis of evil’? That would be Gingrich-Romney-Cain.
Report Post »YoungBloodNews
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:00amGlennster, mind improving the forum structure here? The best part of the Blaze is the comments.
Dow’s going crazy hahaha what a scam.
New product: SHAM-DOW – hustled by over-eager prostitute biting showmen
On Bachs, well I already addressed here in my comment below so nothing to add here…
Report Post »HuskerDave
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:24amThe truth can be scary.
Report Post »smackdown33
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:44amBachmann, like the rest of the GOP field, is doing nothing more than kissing the ring of the current king David, Netanyahu. Her axis of evil comes right out of Richard Perle’s, and the other Jewish Zionists from the past Bush administration, who wrote “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” Written in 1996, it has become America’s policy for Israel, taking both American lives and wealth.
Israel is the axle of evil, around which all else spins in the Middle East.
Report Post »Bullfarm
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:44am@Susanna and @Endgamer – I had the same trouble with no response from GBTV that made any sense… so… I cancelled. I hate it because I enjoyed the shows, but I am not paying for a service that doesn’t work well enough to hear it.
Report Post »Sibyl
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:28amThe truth Bachmann and Beck have the integrity to tell should scare us – especially considering the stupid and intentionally (fiscally, morally, Constitutionally ) destructive, lawless and irresponsible actions of the current administration and the powers that be in Europe.
Bachmann and Santorum are the most trustworthy of the bunch.
Report Post »Al J Zira
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:47am@Susanna: Occupy The Feed! I agree that there is a problem with the volume coming from GBTV. I don’t have that issue with other sites. If we can’t get a response from anyone at GBTV do what I did; send messages to Jeff on The Feed everyday. Just type in your problem and let him know you feel like no one cares. Overwhelm the system! LOL!
Report Post »VRW Conspirator
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:26pm@Susana and Endgame
My volume on GBTV always starts out at zero in the PLAYER window…for some reason it just starts there and I just have to put it to maximum and level my speaker volume for the computer at whatever normal setting I have.
It is a player issue not a GBTV issue. This is the same player and technology that MLB uses on their website. I haven‘t tested to see if their player does the same thing but it is an issue that GBTV can’t fix without redoing the Shockware/Flash player that they use to broadcast.
As for CS at GBTV, I got a response when I sent out a general email about employment. The person who responded was actually an assistant to Glenn that gave me the HR manager’s email and address in NYC.
Report Post »kellied
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:48pmCRAKAVELI* people like you scare the hell out of us. Rational thinking??? You are a Robot, you need to move to a place with a dictator, so he can tell you how many baths you need to take-what to eat and how often- what to buy-and how much money you should make-and healthcare?If you get sick you more than likely will have to die! I am sure the government will get back to you as soon as possible… You are too stupid to know that you are stupid.
Report Post »jsmpsn
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:48pm@Susanna @Endgamer Got to http://web.gbtv.com/faq/contact.jsp and submit a technical support request. With the amount of email they get I doubt they can worry about support. That is why they have the form to fill out so the proper people can get contacted. I think there maybe an email address so you can email them as well. The volume sometimes is low within the embedded media player. Turn that up and then turn up your physical computer. This isn’t necessarily and issue with your computer or the GBTV product. It’s just typical with Flash.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:53pmI agree with her about Gingrich — Gringrich actually said that the US should ALLOW TERRORIST ATTACKS from time to time!
video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=d4lLLxbbOf0#t=0s
Report Post »1minuteman
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:20pmi think bachman is dead on right. she never changes. she tells it like it is and that is why the powers to be make it hard for her to win.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:51pmWhat America needs:
to defund ObamaCare
pass Audit the Fed
repeal the so-called “Patriot” Act. (that Bachmann voted for)
stop our spending spree overseas and help forge a more constitutional and rational foreign policy.
stop Real ID
stop TSA’s jackbooted thuggery
pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution to end the insanity of spending money we do not have.
If that sounds good to you, then instead of the Republican party, the Democrat party — join the Campaign for Liberty (that includes special people of both parties).
http://www.campaignforliberty.org/
Report Post »pelermon
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:56pmCrakaveli – I don’t know how you meant that – But what she is describing, does scare the hell out of me (FOR THE 1ST TIME). She does not, She has more integrity then ANYTHING we have ever seen in Washington.
GINGRICH / BACHMANN or BACHMANN / GINGRICH
Report Post »Lets Roll
TimH
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:22pmIf you define “rational” as secular humanist evolutionary Marxist thought, then yes Bachmann would scare the hell out of you. AND…. that would be a good thing.
http://www.BornAgainHeathens.com
Report Post »dianec6
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:30pmand thank you Glenn for making it possible for us to hear from her. I know what she says is scary, it is also the truth. I also know she wants what tea party people want. I would like our troops to come home, before anymore of our peoples’blood is shed. I didn’t hear how she feels about that. The Middle East Culture will go back to what it has always been. Sad but true. I just read Newt is not for small gov. nor closing the border. How about NAFTA? Michele Bachman speaks for what I want for my country, don’t know if I trust Newt even if he is smart and debates good.
Report Post »riverdog1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:43pmwow, russia, iran and n. korea are new? next thing this brainiac will tell us that the sky is blue (although not in her world).
Report Post »techengineer11
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:29pmBachmann there’s no need to go looking for evil outside of America.. There’s plenty of it on our very own streets.. As a matter of fact I doubt seriously that any Nation on the planet maybe with the exception of Mexico has a higher homocide rate than America..lol So who’s really evil Michelle?
Report Post »oldschoolgreen
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:38pmGreat! Lets have another Cold War. I miss the old one. Good times.
Report Post »Country Publius
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:47pmWhat is it about people with the courage to tell the Truth that scares the hell out of people like you Crak?
Report Post »HerrBeck
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:58pmShe is scary. Only the truly crazy people here, who never read past the first comment support her.
Report Post »But she almost made a point.
We are out of cash, so we need to close all tax loopholes and tax the wealthy and corporations at a higher rate to get out of our debt and rebuild our country. But won’t say that, because she knows the people here wouldn’t support her if she did.
But remember folks, buy some gold and plant a fear garden. That will help.
patriot50
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:17pmyes this should scare you but it also makes me wonder why more people like her are not in office also why she is’nt a front runner in the polls there is something wrong in the us and i see it like a cancer but when and if it is ripped out will the host survive or will it die it seems like the rats are gaining all they can before jumping ship i pray that people get a clue and try to turn this around because it may already be too late
Report Post »knoethetruth
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:47pmWhat all of you are seeing with your very eyes and ears, is prophecy. The BIBLE written by GOD himself, has chosen to inform anyone who reads it and understands it, that one of the signs of the completion of this present age, is the formation of a one world dictatorship government, and the attempt of the TOTAL distruction of Israel. The alignments of China, Russia, and the middle east, are predicted by scripture, and the total colapse of all nations because of the misuse of money. With all nations around the world being broke, and NO solutions by anyone to restore physical stability, YES, the AntiChrist will be revieled, and WILL have the answer to all the worlds economic stuggles, or so the world will think. I would suggest to all you athiests (which there are none) or at least all you who are arrogant enough to think your smarter than GOD, might want to look at the Jack Van Impe website and become informed from not only a man that has memorized the entire BIBLE, but can show you thru the understanding of Scripture, exactly what this earth is about to go thru. Its not pretty. Just so you also know how merciful GOD is, once you understand the salvation that is available to you for eternal life, you will not have to go thru the TERRIBLE times this earth is about to experience, because you will go to heaven prior to this time in the Rapture. Believe and be free.
Report Post »Nonie
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:35pmLet’s get this right – having someone tell you what is going on scares you but having the crooks that are in control of this country do what ever they want with our lives, futures and money doesn’t? That’s why we are in this mess too many of us had our heads in the sand too long. Come up for fresh air and breathe the truth, after the initial shock you will get new life so you can take control and own yourself.
Report Post »onemadmex
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:13pmCrak did you listen to Michell? Or did you just throw your verbal bomb as you put to another person. If you actually did listen to her and you still feel that way, then your name says it all…..’cause you must be smokin crak….
Report Post »nmgene
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 2:02amIt amazes me how our uneducated people can take shots at a true Christian Conservative woman. Maybe it is because she is something they could never be. The trolls twist everything she says. Michelle Bachmann would make a great President and the rest of the world would be scared to death of her just as they were of Reagan. She doesnt back down and wont be pushed. She is a great American Patriot.
Report Post »old white guy
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 6:31amcraka, you would seem to be afraid of the wrong things.
Report Post »OutOfTheAether
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 11:25amSusanna,
Report Post »I am able to hear GBTV ok. You may want to try using a different browser. I use both Firefox or Chrome with equal results.
antiencenom
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 1:12pmWe’ll miss you gamender,NOT
Report Post »pompey
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 2:07pm……thanks for the the view from the fascist left.
This woman is clearly the most qualified candidate to be president of the United States. Not only does she have the best grasp of the issues but she has never wavered from her positions and has steeley determination to follow through on her promises…..
Report Post »Solzhenitsin
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 2:52pmThe life of the left is lived in fear.
Report Post »Rabble In Arms
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 5:03pmThen you don’t have anything to worry about…..
Report Post »Rechercar
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 5:16pmThis is nuts, gents…Crackaveli posts at best an ambivalent yet ambiguous comment regarding Bachmann, and everyone assumes they know what he meant. He didn’t explain himself. That’s pretty much the end of the story.
I agree with him. Bachmann on financial policy and warning of a depression = great. For that I love her. Bachmann on foreign policy is a disaster, and I don’t think she knows nearly enough of the history of the Mideast to make any kind of informed decision.
Russia’s involved with Iran. We used to be. So did Israel. We backed and funded Saddam Hussein during the Iran-Iraq War; Israel funded Iran. Both did awful things.
Glenn quotes the UN concern about 250 children murdered, and his concern is justified and good. Well, look, Hussein was busy gassing the Kurds and several innocent Iranian villages during the Iran-Iraq war (once he started losing), and we in the US had no problem funneling him weapons, money, and (with Germany) the components to make his deadly gas. Also, it should be noted that he started the war, not Iran.
In short, taking a “moral” stance towards the Mideast will elicit nothing but laughter from China and Russia. A president needs to know these things. Hell, common soldiers need to know these things. Calling old friends an “axis of evil” just because you didn’t learn the history is a good way to begin preludes to a future war.
Report Post »martinez012577
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:13pmYet she is for staying overseas in constant war. Look lets be honest, we are viewed as weak around the world. 99% of the countries of the world dont respect women. Making one president is a mistake. Not to mention she has alot of bad policy.
Ron Paul 2012
Report Post »9635kari
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:28pmWhy does she have bad policy and Ron Paul is the one to save the day? His foreign policy is frightening in a time when the world is crumbling. We have to have a presence in many areas of the world as they are aligning themselves with everyone but the USA and Israel. Get a grip on yourself and stop following the Pied Piper Ron Paul right over the cliff!
Report Post »grayling646
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:38pmAnybody but Obama or Paul in 2012!!!
Report Post »martinez012577
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:38pmLOL you are right, the policy we have had for 100 years is working great.
Albert Einstein once said “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/12047
Keep letting the media tell you who to vote for.
Report Post »grayling646
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:41pmPaul has been running for president over and over again. Is he expecting a different result? Are you?
Report Post »martinez012577
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:38am@ gray
Well there are alot of morons out there that dont understand economics or war. I am guessing you are in that group since you dont understand Ron Paul.
What is it you dont like about Dr. Paul?
Is it the fact he doesnt waver on issues?
Do you not like cutting 1 trillion off the deficit the first year and having the budget balanced in 4 years?
Do you think giving countries that hate us money is a good idea?
Do you like the fed?
Do you want us to continue to TRY to police the world?
Should we keep our 900 bases in 180 different countries going while we go broke here?
Is his small govt. send power back to the states ideas just to much for you to grasp?
Do you dislike our constitution?
If you answer yes to those things then yes you are against Ron Paul.
Report Post »phillipwgirard
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:49amI think what she said is frightening, does it frighten me? HE11 YES, and i don‘t believe i’m a coward by no means. i think we should all listen to those who have more information than us, or are privy to such info. no one has to agree with her, but it will not hurt to listen, just my thoughts, i’m not trying to be overbearing or cruel, , , Phil
Report Post »Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:02am@martinez012577
Report Post »Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:13pm
Yet she is for staying overseas in constant war. Look lets be honest, we are viewed as weak around the world. 99% of the countries of the world dont respect women. Making one president is a mistake. Not to mention she has alot of bad policy.
***
BUT….. The whole world respected Margaret Thatcher….BECAUSE SHE MEANT WHAT SHE SAID!!! I have a feeling Michelle Bachmann would elicit the same response!!!! AFTER ALL LOOK AT THE WIMPS WE HAVE RUNNING THE SHOW NOW!!!! ALL BUT HILLARY ARE MALE, AND SHE HAS MORE COHONES THAN BILL WHEN IT COMES WITH DEALING WITH HER ENEMIES!!!
Besides, Bachmann’s privy to National Security briefings, maybe she knows a lot that would change Ron Paul‘s mind if he really knew what’s going on!!!
Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:09am@martinez012577
Report Post »Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:38pm
LOL you are right, the policy we have had for 100 years is working great
****
For a good portion of that 100 years we were considered a force to be reckoned with and during THAT 100 YRS. WE WERE ONLY ATTACKED 2 TIMES, AND WENT AND LIBERATED ALL OF EUROPE, AND MANY OTHER NATIONS! It wasn’t until the American left got all militant against military power, that we became the laughing stock of the world, and had to try to buy friends until it’s bankrupted us!!!
Badger Patriot
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:06am99.99999999% of the world does not respect obamer! Do you remember Margeret Thatcher? She had Respect. Michelle Bachmann it Exactly The person to lead our once Great country back to where we belong as a world leader. And Yes She Can Win. She will take Iowa and be right back in this. I think she will also pick up all those who jumped off the Cain train.
Report Post »West Coast Patriot
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 5:37amGrayling, how many times has Paul run?? How many times has Romney run?? For that matter, how many times has Cain run?? I think you will find, if you figure out how to research before you post isiotic comments, that they are all pretty close. The newbies are Bachman, Gingrich, Huntsman and Santorum. Cain has run more than them. Research will set you free if you would not be so lazy.
Report Post »Blackhawk1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:45ammartinez012577
Well there are alot of morons out there that dont understand economics or war. I am guessing you are in that group since you dont understand Ron Paul.
What is it you dont like about Dr. Paul?
I’ll give that one a shot
He has had more Earmarks (Stealing from taxpayers to buy votes) than 98% of all other Congressman
He believes it’s a good idea for a Rogue Nation (Iran) to posses a Nuclear Weapon to wipe out one of our allies (Israel).
He has been living off Taxpayers for a good portion of his adult life but never had a piece of Legislation passed authored by him. If I was as ineffective at my job as Ron Paul is at his I would have been fired long ago.
Report Post »Shamrock241
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:54am@Martinez012577 Imagine your locked in a cell with an inmate 7 feet tall and 350lbs who is on death row, so he has nothing to loose for any further harm he may cause. Now your little ASS is locked up with, if he tells you he wants the bottom bunk YOU WILL give it to him, if he tells you HE WANTS your slice of pizza at lunch YOU WILL give it to him. Why will you submit because you know without question he is superior in strenght and will carry out any threat he has made. America has grown soft because of LIBERALISM so the tyrants of the world do not take us seriously as a Super Power, so they will do as they please and that is why the world is spiraling out of control WALK TALL AND CARRY A BIG!!!!!! STICK and there will be peace again. Ron Paul is NOT the answer.
Report Post »KTsayz
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:00amOh yeah! President Ron Paul 2012
Report Post »DrFrost
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:55am@MARTINEZ
“Is it the fact he doesnt waver on issues?” – Martinez
That might be true, but I doubt it. Most people change their minds on various issues as more evidence comes to light. Flip-flopping is not always a bad thing. Regardless, it’s not an issue I have with Ron Paul.
“Do you not like cutting 1 trillion off the deficit the first year and having the budget balanced in 4 years?” – Martinez
Depends on what is cut, how it’s done and what the side effects are. Overall, however, I’m definitely for a balanced budget and a small government. Ron Paul’s principals here are spot on in my book.
“Do you think giving countries that hate us money is a good idea?” – Martinez
This is soundbite material. How a country feels about us should have absolutely NOTHING to do with whether we give them money. Stop and think! If giving them money helps us in the short and long run WE SHOULD DO IT! I think if Dr. Paul would stop and consider this he would come to the same conclusion. The president’s job is not to reward those who like us or to punish those who dislike us. The president’s main job is to protect this nation.
“Do you like the fed?” – Martinez
Nope. I’d love for it to be audited. I’d love for those details to be made public. And I’d love to know who owns this private institution.
“Do you want us to continue to TRY to police the world?” – Martinez
This is where I deviate most from Ron Paul. I may not want to “police the
Report Post »DrFrost
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:56amI may not want to “police the world” but I think ignoring it would be a grave mistake. If we put our head in the sand now, we may really dislike what we see when we finally pull it out.
“Should we keep our 900 bases in 180 different countries going while we go broke here?” – Martinez
We’ve had these bases for a long time and going broke is only a recent development. This is not cause and effect. Do these bases help make the world a more stable place? Yes! Is that not more important now than ever?
I realize we’re going broke. I realize we need to make deep cuts. But let’s not throw away our future to fix our present crisis.
“Is his small govt. send power back to the states ideas just to much for you to grasp?” – Martinez
Now you’re moving into the “insult your opponent” realm. Not productive. For anyone who’s reading the discussion objectively, this behavior only reflects poorly on you, not those you are debating.
“Do you dislike our constitution?” – Martinez
Love it. And I know Ron Paul does as well. But so does Gary Johnson. And so, in my opinion, does Michelle Bachman.
Report Post »HAPPYRWE
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:14amGrayling and all others……..and we have been going down hill ever since……..if Paul and his ideas would have been in the big house we would not be in this crap past our ears….The truth and common sense is hard to swallow when you have had the iron fist shoved down your throat for the past 80 years. Freedom lovers won’t win cause this election is going to be run like OWS, chaos.
Report Post »Michelle would be my second pick so why don’t they run together…………………
So if Iran does or does not blow everyone up like they would like, including Israel, has Iran changed history, prophecy. We stand with Israel but we stand with God and morality in America first.
Adult and child porn, Abortions, broken marriages and families, a devastated economy, communists in the White house and we are gonna go out and help others before fixing ourselves. I do believe we can’t trust in one man or woman to save our country we have got to do it together. Ron Paul has the most sound policies, they worked for our country when it first began, what is the problem now. The truth is eternal, we don’t change just cause everything else does.
HAPPYRWE
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:44amMil Mom Please get some education on politics and Ron Paul, I believe Paul knows a lot more than Bachman, he knows what is going on. He has been fighting what is going on long before Glenn Beck started telling it like it is. Ron Paul has been valiant in his fight against the anti-American powers that be that are in control on all levels. Isn’t Bachman a lawyer, what does scripture say about when lawyers rule the governments……not good, reminds me of when Romney stated in a debate that he would decide on what to do based on what his lawyers said…..hun? Paul is pro- Constitution all the way through and through. Don’t defend big federal government even through ignorance, defend our life, liberty and our individual pursuit of happiness………….
Report Post »HAPPYRWE
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:59amBlack hawk you don’t understand politics and the Constitution based on your comment. Earmarks are a natural process of the law. They are so that some of the money goes to the states and local branches and not completely to the federal levels of spending allocations.
Report Post »Like said before people don’t understand that what they see on TV is not always reality and the truth, you have got to research for yourself.
warchief65
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 1:56amTell me something , how are you going to put us back in the black , if you only take 1 trillion off the books , for four years ? The debt is , right now and counting , 15 ,453 ,756,645,432 . Your not even going to put a dent on the deficit . And , in 2 years , it’s going to be 16 trillion . Even if you pay back 2 trillion . Or sooner . On order to wipe out the deficit , we have to cut deep , deep , spending . And , you can’t raise the taxes , or make new ones . They have to cut down the worker in the government , and cut the pay of the Senators and Congress people . And cut off of “ giving ” the Illegal Aliens money , from welfare , medical , housing and schooling . We have to take care of our own , first .
Report Post »Eliasim
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:12pmLet me ask people: do you think that God Almighty defends heaven from perpetrators, and also defends his wife? And don’t you pray to do on earth as it is in Heaven? Then, what the hell is the debate all about?
Report Post »YoungBloodNews
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:22pmI like your thinking even though many don’t.
God gave us the tools required. Heck our 1st and 2nd amendments are based on them:
Report Post »The Sword of the Spirit and the Sword of just defense…
phillipwgirard
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:54am@ELIASIM True…
Report Post »Jack of Hearts
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:04amGod has a wife? I think you‘ll find she was airbrushed out of the Bible fairly early on in it’s development.
Report Post »Saved Forever
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 6:48am@Jack of Hearts – You might want to read Hosea and some good commentary on it like Jameson Faucet and Brown and/or Mathew Henry.
Report Post »Jack of Hearts
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:36am@Saved forever
Report Post »No thanks, I prefer non-fiction.
Saved Forever
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:03am@Jack of Hearts – Ah, then you should stay away from telling people what you think is in scripture if you will not take the time to actually read it.
Report Post »RestoreFederalism
Posted on December 7, 2011 at 7:57pm“God Almighty defends heaven from perpetrators, and also defends his wife?” Blasphemer, God doesn’t have a wife.
Report Post »star7mj
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:12pmI’m leaning toward Bachmann and Santorum or Santorum and Bachmann. I honestly believe that Glenn Beck has it right. I pray our country can be protected from Obama and his evil ways committee. God Bless America and Israel. I Stand with America and Israel. ♥
Report Post »Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:18amI like your ticket, EITHER WAY!!! They‘re the only ones who’ve been calmly steadfast in their beliefs from the beginning of holding public office. NEITHER QUITS WHEN THE GOING DOESN’T SEEM TO GO THEIR WAY!!! AND BOTH ARE CAMPAIGNING EXACTLY AS THEY’VE LEGISLATED! Wow, ain’t that a change we can all believe in????
Report Post »LibertarianRight
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:55am@Mil Mom
Ron Paul has been consistent in his beliefs for over 30 years in Congress. If that’s your only criteria, you will get nowhere. What we really need is to return to the freedom that our soldiers fought for between 1776 and 1945, instead of the unconstitutional, undeclared wars, and imposed CIA regime change since then that has been the cause of most of our problems. People say that we are trying to be the “policeman of the world”, but we are really more like the “schoolyard bully of the world.”
Report Post »pamela kay
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:38amSTAR7MJ, while I agree with you and Beck, but I don’t believe either could beat the progressives. Especially when Hillary steps into the picture. If we even have an election in 2012. I am worried that this President will accomplish more in the next year than we could ever predict. We are in trouble either way. The stage is set, their ducks are all in a row and the money and power keeps flooding in. To think that a win for conervatives is a sure thing is a grave mistake.I went back and looked at some of the older srories here on the Blaze, every day we are bombarded in so many directions. Imagine what the next twelve months will be like. I agree with Bachman this is true evil and the progressives have no morals or compassion for the people here in our country. They will have no problem throwing all of us under the bus, including their sheeples to accomplish their agenda. They do not love or respect America and will stop at nothing to bring her to her knees.
Report Post »UrsaMajor
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:56amWhile I am glad that Bachmann and Santorum SAY that they stand for Israel, it’s too bad neither of them had the courage to actually GO and stand WITH Israel a few months ago.
Only ONE Republican had the leadership and guts to back up his words with action.
But, we are supposed to forget that and help Glenn help the Progressive/Fascist Mainstream Media chase him out of the race for a public sector office and back into the private sector where he “belongs”.
Report Post »UrsaMajor
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:05amAll of the other Republican candiadtes SAY they stand with Israel.
Herman Cain was the only one who had the true leadership to actually do it.
Why didn’t Bachmann, Santorum or any of the others have the guts to?
How quickly we forget things like that when the Progessive/Fascist Mainstream unleashs its Saul Alinsky claws into someone.
Report Post »bhohater
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:25amI simply can’t understand why so many conservatives like Ron Paul. He believes in no government at all, hell we have to have some government or we’d have total chaos. It‘s just gotten so big it’s out of control and no one can get a handle on it. I’ve flip-flopped back and forth between several candidates and right now I think Michele Bachmann is the best choice. She is a proven conservative and a true patriot who will not change her views to get elected like the others have done. What more do you want? You are not going to agree with anyone about everything.
Report Post »KTsayz
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:05am@BHOhater – Why do you hate our Constitution so much? Ron Paul is the only candidate who meant it when he swore to uphold our Constitution. He didn’t vote for the unPatriot Act which is stripping away the few rights we have remaining. Ron Paul submitted a bill to withdraw the US from the UN and kick the UN out of the US. Why didn’t Newt and Bachmann support that bill? Because they are both Big Government shills!
Report Post »President Ron Paul 2012
HAPPYRWE
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:20amTo BHO –States rights does not equate to NO Government?? Our Founders did not want a tyrannical government running the whole show, we want our voices heard and they are heard much better at the state and local level. States rights =the United States of America this is where freedom flourishes, not with big, secret, growing government….???
Report Post »Bill in Texas
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:39pmI agree. Anyone but Obamney.
http://klsouth.wordpress.com/top-posts-essays/the-romney-rino-scorecard/
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:26pmI agree — anyone but ROMNEY and GINGRICH!
Report Post »YoungBloodNews
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:11pm“Bachmann later noted that it was Senator John McCain, rather than former President George W. Bush, who got it right when looking into Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin’s eyes. McCain, according to Bachmann, saw “KGB,“ not a ”soul,” noting that the former Republican presidential nominee may have been more accurate than Bush in his assessment of the Russian PM.”
Keep shilling Blaze writer Tiffany… The NEW Evil is brought to you by Hack McCain:
Defense bill contained an amendment that would give the exec. branch the ability to classify anyone a terrorist (that includes you American citizen) and strip you of your rights. In essence hold you indefinitely, deny your right to a civilian trial and replace it with a military tribunal…
Everyone here knows who runs the exec. branch and its intentions. This is NOT good.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/195889-sens-paul-mccain-clash-over-terrorist-detainee-amendment-
“If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy”- James Madison
BUT HEY, Keep fearing the boogeyman. You fail to mention the terrible INTERNAL social unrest in your ‘axis’… Stay stupid, it clearly shows (or your a paid shill and its all about your love of the $$$)…
Report Post »wbalzley
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:25pmPeople said similar things about a young Austrian named Adolph Hitler when he became prime minister of Germany…sometimes the “boogey men” are real…
Report Post »YoungBloodNews
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:44amWho said what? Your so ignorant of history its scary. Young Adolf was JAILED for his opinions early on. Hitler united his people thru race and heritage aka FASCISM – where is your connection to present day – yea diversity USA? Oh and we imported many German scientists as long as they‘d ’work for us’. Damn your stupid ;)
No the boogeyman is NOT real, but you still believe in him. Care to take on my points: many of these countries suffering from internal unrest. You might make a solid case there…
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:47amAdolf Hitler said, when announcing the Gestapo to the people, “An evil exists that threatens every man, woman and child of this great Nation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland.”
“The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.” James Madison
“Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.” James Madison
I think that the Father of the Constitution might have a valid point.
Report Post »staggerlee32
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:31am“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” – Benjamin Franklin
Report Post »KTsayz
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:09amAny candidate who supports the unPatriot Act is a traitor.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:16amok youngbloodedfool….you are actually claiming by your twisted logic that Madison was claiming we should never fight a war with a foreign enemy? Grow up.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:25amBachmann simply says that McCain was right when he said Putin was no friend of the USA….and you Paulbots conclude that she wants to go to war with Russia…absolutely typical. How is it that one of the greatest advocates for liberty, Ron Paul has his reputation destroyed by his own childish supporters. Your tactics are those of the left. Grow up.
Report Post »HAPPYRWE
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:35amThank you true Ron Paul supporters. History is to be kept alive to learn from it. Our history has been tarnished and all but washed away. Our kids and nation know more about the history of Hollywood’s everyday life than the history of real America and our Founders.
McCain voted for Amnesty then made a commercial stating “just build the dam_ fence” he is a two faced politician. We are doomed for the next X amount of years if people don’t get off of their bandwagon to support their favorite representatives. We need to vote based on truth and consequence. All of these media driven and supported political “actors” are creating confusion, division, and a very well played out smokescreen. Hasn’t anyone learned of Progressivism, it’s all a game and a big joke on us…………Why is Beck not supporting Paul…………..sigh………
Ron Paul has been the one voice up against the Armageddon of our crooked, lying, power hungry, anti-American politicians for 30 years……………
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:52am@Happyrwe I’d guess that glenn beck supports ron paul on everything except his foreign policy. The bigger picture, which Paul ignores and glenn focuses on, is that this is not simply a world of nations and borders, but of good vs evil. If Muslims are not opposed and they are unrestrained the world will be dominated by evil.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:01pm@George Patton Our third US President and principle Author of the Declaration of Independence said, “I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe [insert the Middle East here]. Their political interests are entirely distinct from ours. Their mutual jealousies, their balance of power, their complicated alliances, their forms and principles of government, are all foreign to us. They are nations of eternal war.” This could be said of any Muslim Nation.
And what did our sixth US President and Father of the federal Constitutions James Madison think about War?
“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; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people… [There is also an] inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and… degeneracy of manners and of morals. . . . No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare…”
Continued…
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:01pmContinued.
“…[It should be well understood] that the powers proposed to be surrendered [by the Third Congress] to the Executive were those which the Constitution has most jealously appropriated to the Legislature…
The Constitution expressly and exclusively vests in the Legislature the power of declaring a state of war… the power of raising armies… the power of creating offices…
A delegation of such powers [to the President] would have struck, not only at the fabric of our Constitution, but at the foundation of all well organized and well checked governments.
The separation of the power of declaring war from that of conducting it, is wisely contrived to exclude the danger of its being declared for the sake of its being conducted.
The separation of the power of raising armies from the power of commanding them, is intended to prevent the raising of armies for the sake of commanding them.
The separation of the power of creating offices from that of filling them, is an essential guard against the temptation to create offices for the sake of gratifying favourites or multiplying dependents.”
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:18pm@George Patton Actually, Glenn Beck pretty much agrees with Paul’s foreign policy, but for some odd and weird reason, who knows why, he just hasn’t publicly stated his support. It even seems that Paul is the only candidate that agrees with Israel’s officials.
In Glenn Beck’s own words, “There’s something happening in America. That Americans are beginning to disconnect with both Parties. And they’re becoming much more like the founders. Some. And, the founders would’ve said, ‘We’re friends to everybody, and enemies to nobody. We mind our own business.‘ America doesn’t have the money or resources anymore to be the Policemen of the world. Explain to somebody, what it means to stand by Israel. We have to go over and fight wars, with you? Or, what does it mean?”
Former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Dore Gold promptly answered Beck’s question, “That is PRECISELY the point. Israel never asked the United States to risk the lives of American troops to defend it… We don’t want American troops or any other troops defending Israel. We want to fulfill the doctrine of the founder of Israel, David Ben-Gurion, of self-reliance – that Israel defends itself BY ITSELF. And what we ask for from the United States is diplomatic support so we can maintain that position.” youtube.com/watch?v=jxxBuNWKgZQ
“You don’t need to send troops to Israel. We defend ourselves!” – Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu youtube.com/watch?v=4H3Kyt1iGEE#t=2m
Report Post »HAPPYRWE
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:21pm@Patton- Madison said in the (guise) of a foreign war, which means this tactic would be used to propel us into tyranny.
Report Post »Our progressive government has aided, funded, ab bedded, supported, and protected it’s foreign interest of global government. This progressive/Marxist government has been nation building and destroying for a reason- control and power over countries. This is the new world order that is in full swing. Our government has been a major if not the integral part of this realization. We can’t fight evil with evil. We must go back to our original intent of a sovereign nation with our hands out of the UN and out of the game of Risk.
Progressive politics and a disintegration of morality, mainly throwing God out of our lives, has caused our societies ills, so because we have abortions, murders, porn etc. we should lean on “the end justifies the means” or lets let the government save us now? This is how we have been “set up”, Beck has pointed out the proof in history how this has happened over and over again, we have been torn down and set up to be rebuilt to a Communist system.
Our new way of thinking has got to be the old way of thinking, old fashioned capitalism, conservatism and reliance on God, the Constitution and common sense.
Ron Paul follows this crucial way of thinking. We have been put in a situation where it‘s either their way or God’s way, two roads to choose.
George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:30pm@colt…..really….i need to explain this again…ugh. Your quote from our 3rd president about not getting involved in quarrels between other nations is valid, but of course you take it to the wrong conclusion. You take it to the conclusion to never fight a war with another nation because other nations are foreign….really??? A war that defends American interests is NOT a foreign war even if it takes place in foreign land. What he was saying is don’t get involved in wars that are quarrels BETWEEN foreign nations that have nothing to do with US interests. Don’t pick sides if france goes to war with spain over a dispute about who has the hottest women. So this does not apply to a nation that has called for the destruction of the US and Israel….thats not a quarrel between foreign nations…but you twist Jefferson’s words. Again, a war that defends American interests is NOT a foreign war even if it takes place in foreign land. Why did we ever fight Germany…i mean after all it was the japanese who attacked us. ww2 was just a quarrel between foreign nations right? Paulbots twist the words of our founders worse than liberals.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:36pmoh happyrwe…..think…a little. just because someone says the sky is gray doesn’t mean it is always gray. Just because Madison said in the (guise) of a foreign war, which means this tactic would be used to propel us into tyranny, that doesn’t mean every foreign war is a secret ploy to install tyranny……ugh.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:36pm@George Patton Our first President and great General George Washington said, in a letter to James Madison, “I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation had a right to inter-meddle in the internal concerns of another; and that, if this country could, consistent with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace.”
In his last Farewell Address, Washington said, ” Observe good faith and justice toward all nations. Cultivate peace and harmony with all. …The nation which indulges toward another an habitual hatred or an habitual fondness is in some degree a slave. It is a slave to its animosity or to its affection, either of which is sufficient to lead it astray from its duty and its interest.”
We should always seek and most certainly consider Constitutional means based on Organic Law to find the solutions to our National problems, home or abroad.
In matters of War we should never allow the President to decide the terms or reasons for War. Our great General and first President, George Washington, said, “The constitution vests the power of declaring war in Congress; therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they shall have deliberated upon the subject and authorized such a measure.”
We have a moral obligation and precedent, in this Nation, a tradition to strictly adhere to the Rule of Law. To deviate from this path, is to fall into the darkness of Tyranny and Arbitrary Rule.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:42pm@George Patton I never said, Don’t engage in War. I only advocate for our Nation to engage in Constitutional wars, that is, those declared and engaged under our Rule of Law based on a Just War theory. James Madison said, “The power to declare war, including the power of judging the causes of war, is fully and exclusively vested in the legislature … the executive has no right, in any case, to decide the question, whether there is or is not cause for declaring war.” My problem is with Obama, or any President, deciding all the terms of War, and when and why to send our Troops to harms way, in foreign lands, without the Authorization of our elected Representatives, in Congress. I’m not against War. I don’t know where you got that from. I’m against Executive wars because they are unconstitutional. In WW2, we passed a constitutional Declaration of War by Congress, fought the enemy, defeated the enemy, won the war, ended the war, and brought our troops back home.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:57pm@colt. I never claimed that congress shouldn’t be the ones to declare war. You’re right,congress declares war..but so what… that is another discussion. And I don’t disagree with any of your quotes…just your interpretation of them. Yes, I like Washington, don’t want to meddle in the affairs of other nations….and like Washington I know that doesn’t mean we never fight other nations.
Also what about the broader moral questions….if your position is we should not get involved in foreign wars that do not directly affect us, to what extreme can we morally take this. Lets take this outlandish hypothetical: The tiny fictitious nation of Weeble starts a global conquest. It invades france and kills literally every human there. Then it invades spain and kills literally every human there…soon every living creature in all of europe is dead. If we follow your dogmatic unyielding position the imaginary country of Weeble should be left to kill every human being on earth so long as they don’t harm Americans. Can you not see the danger in this dogmatic position?
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:05pm@colt. If Pauls position is not simply that congress should declare war…he goes further….further than you apparently are willing to go. With iran for example, paul doesn’t just say that congress decides if we go to war with iran, and then leaves it at that. He goes further and believes iran should have nukes if they want them, and he would not support congress‘s decision to go to war with iran because he believes we have no interest in israel’s annihilation. That is wrong…it is why I do not support him.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:23pm@George Patton We went to two wars almost exactly based on your hypotheses, and they were constitutionally declared. And what is my interpretation? I think your mixing mine‘s with some other user’s. I’m not against war, in fact, I support war when it comes to defending our Nation and our Rights. But we do not give up our Rights to defend our Rights. We will never get them back, in such a case. Another thing, your hypothesis is based on a truly a isolationist position. Which I, nor Paul, supports. We are for trade and friendship with Nations; that is against isolationism. If our friendships and trade with other Nations was threatened or put into great peril, like in WW2, of course we would react and respond to protect our Nation’s interests. Isolationism is dangerous in our modern world. But I, nor Paul, advocates that we stop alliances, friendships, diplomacy, trade, commerce or communication to other Nations. On the contrary, we favor the best relationships with other Nations, to protect our interests here at home. We only seek to engage in war within the Rule of Law, and when absolutely necessary, for as stated in the above quotes, if managed by the wrong administration or on wrong principles, it would become our worst enemy to our security and liberties. World history is engulfed with war. There is no Nation that has survived continual warfare; it’s led to their destruction economically, morally and nationally. My concern is not war, but the abuse of War.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:26pm@George Patton
In Glenn Beck’s own words, “There’s something happening in America. That Americans are beginning to disconnect with both Parties. And they’re becoming much more like the founders. Some. And, the founders would’ve said, ‘We’re friends to everybody, and enemies to nobody. We mind our own business.‘ America doesn’t have the money or resources anymore to be the Policemen of the world. Explain to somebody, what it means to stand by Israel. We have to go over and fight wars, with you? Or, what does it mean?”
Former Israeli Ambassador to the United Nations Dore Gold promptly answered Beck’s question, “That is PRECISELY the point. Israel never asked the United States to risk the lives of American troops to defend it… We don’t want American troops or any other troops defending Israel. We want to fulfill the doctrine of the founder of Israel, David Ben-Gurion, of self-reliance – that Israel defends itself BY ITSELF. And what we ask for from the United States is diplomatic support so we can maintain that position.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxxBuNWKgZQ
“You don’t need to send troops to Israel. We defend ourselves!” – Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu youtube.com/watch?v=4H3Kyt1iGEE#t=2m
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:48pmColt…this is like arguing with a lib…you never address my points just change the subject…now the subject is changed to whether we should be friends with other nations???? where did that come from…as if someone was advocating we shouldn’t. The issue is this: Paul thinks we should not defend israel and we should allow iran to get nukes. His reason is because its none of our business. My posts have tried to point out why this is a faulty view and not supported by the founders as you have suggested. I do not believe America should crush every evil in the world but I also don’t believe we should allow evil to proliferate unrestrained. Paul and his supporters believe we should not defeat the evil that exists in iran. I disagree and gave you the hypothetical “Weeble” country to illustrate why. So again my question remains to all Paul supporters…WHAT LEVEL OF EVIL IS ACCEPTABLE IN THE WORLD BEFORE AMERICA IS JUSTIFIED TO STEP IN, REGARDLESS OF OUR INTEREST IN THE REGION. If your position is that no matter what we should never step in, then fine. Let’s just be clear.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:13pm@George Patton My personal opinion shouldn’t matter in the arena of Laws and international affairs. That is why I keep referencing the founding fathers (our Constitutional principles) and other more informed persons of great influence (Beck, Gold). Actually, it’s the Liberals who like to dismissive historical evidence along with credible sources in order to support or justify their personal opinions or agendas, that they may advance their special interests without conflict. But, if you want my opinion, fine. No level of Evil is acceptable in the World. Period. However, the United States has no legal or moral obligation to step in those matters which do not affect her. The Ruler and Judge of this World is GOD ALMIGHTY, not America. The Great Governor of this World determines the destiny of each Nation. My position is not that we should never step in. We certainly have the right and power, as a free and independent Nation, to intervene if our intent be righteous. We, if having the opportunity, fortitude, resources, money, time and necessary tools to win the War, should step in to confront any show of Evil that threatens or does harm to humanity, our allies, or any innocent and defenseless neighbors. This of course would be an act of charity and love, on our behalf, done voluntarily and with good will. We have the greatest Military and most prosperous Nation in the whole history of Mankind. I have confidence in our Nation. We can and will defeat our enemies.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:28pmcolt. I’m not asking your opinion. Your position and Paul’s seems to be that we should not engage in wars that have no affect on America. The words of the founders are given as the foundation of this position. I just believe Paul supporters incorrectly interpret those words, thus come to the wrong position. To illustrate why I think you misinterpret the founders words I posed the question “WHAT LEVEL OF EVIL IS ACCEPTABLE IN THE WORLD BEFORE AMERICA IS JUSTIFIED TO STEP IN, REGARDLESS OF OUR INTEREST IN THE REGION” Because if you correctly interpret the founders, their position must be that unless the US is directly affected there is no level of evil so extreme to justify US involvement in a foreign war. Since you admit that there is a level of evil that is unacceptable you are at odds with your own interpretation of the founders. So you either disagree with the founders (and your own view), or you are incorrectly interpreting their view on foreign wars.
Report Post »YoungBloodNews
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 5:00pmColt, I appreciate your additions.
He‘s backwards on Paul’s stance considering it to be isolationism instead of non-interventionalism…
He does not even address the main point I had with the link.
Patton, do you feel better giving up your rights under the Defense Act that would allow an American citizen to be treated as such if labelled a terrorist? The meaning of terrorist is quite broad and not constrained to those from the Middle East or Muslims. Does this not scare you? Especially considering who is in the Oval Office?
One night Patton posts something too critical of the government and the next day Patton is gone never to be heard from again…
The reason I was quoting the McCain part is because McCain authored this part of the bill, so I found it curious. I also added more points that these axis countries are having major internal issues with their own people (China is getting really bad), that most MSM won’t cover.
I was not trying to make this a discussion on how America should act relating to other hostile nations. I was just trying to make you think about this country giving up liberty for security in the homeland – a look inside instead of outside (as so much conversation as been there lately).
Then ending it with a point about the other countries having internal issues as well…
No man escapes when freedom fails;
Report Post »The best men rot in filthy jails.
And those that cried “Appease! Appease”!
Are hanged by those they tried to please.
KTsayz
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 7:15pmColt, don‘t know if you’ll ever read this but that was GREAT! I copyed the whole exchange for future use.
Report Post »What I want to know from Patton is where in the Constitution is the authority to start wars because we don‘t agree with another country’s ‘moral standing’?
But that will never be answered.
colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:00pm@YoungBloodNews & @KTsayz Thanks!
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” John Adams
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:31pmPatton, you said, “Your position and Paul’s seems to be that we should not engage in wars that have no affect on America.” It all depends. We must first evaluate our own current situation, and then decide what’s our best bet. My concern right now in considering whether to continue these wars or engage in new ones is our mounting debt.
We should step in to confront any evil that threatens or does harm to humanity, our allies, or any innocent and defenseless neighbor of ours, if we have the opportunity, fortitude, resources, money, time and necessary tools to win a confrontational War. Of course this action would be taken of our own volition, and on our own terms and conditions. The US doesn’t have some sort of obligation to the world wherein we must act, at our own expense, and sacrifice our liberty; especially if forced through by whatever means necessary, and under arbitrary reasons.
Our good will towards Nations shouldn’t be confused with welfare or entitlements. If we’re bankrupt, borrowing from China, inflating our currency, leaving our borders wide open, electing incompetent Officials, spreading our Military thin, expanding Government powers, and creating more welfare programs, should we really engage in another foreign undeclared War, at our own peril and destruction? That’s my concern, considering our own situation; not to be confused with some assumed position of being against war. Any action we take as a Nation must be through Constitutional means.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 1:56pm@colt and all the other paulbots. Try to stay on topic. My whole point of all these posts is simply that you contradict your own interpretation of the founding fathers. And I am asking you to make a decision.
Here is the quote you use from Jefferson “I have ever deemed it fundamental for the United States never to take active part in the quarrels of Europe” From this you conclude that America should NEVER be involved in a war in defense of another nation. Then I give you a hypothetical about a foreign war in defense of another nation and your response is: “It all depends. We must first evaluate our own current situation” You wield this Jefferson quote against anyone who disagrees with you and label them as anti-constitutional or anti-founding fathers….and i’m tired of it.
Well you can’t have it both ways. You can’t claim that Jefferson meant we should NEVER engage in foreign wars and that you adhere to his doctrine, while simultaneously saying “it all depends” when asked about US involvement in a hypothetical war. If you truly adhere to your interpretation then it doesn’t “depend.” Never means never.
So decide paulbots.
And if you decide that there are indeed some situation where America is justified engaging in a foreign war then for the sake of everyone please stop using that quote to defend your position. I don’t care if you oppose the war in iraq, afghanistan, or an impending one defending israel…..just stop twisting that quote as yo
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 2:28pm@dungbloodnews The reason I never addressed the main point you had with your original post is because I’m not talking to you…duh. So now I’ll respond to your jumbled reply…you said:
“He‘s backwards on Paul’s stance considering it to be isolationism instead of non-interventionalism…”
That is a laughable distinction. Let’s say I invite you to a party…I wonder if it would go like this:
Report Post »ME: hey dungblood, wanna go to a party?
YOU: no, I don’t want to go near other people.
ME: it’s not good to isolate yourself.
YOU: I’m not isolating myself from people, I just don’t want to intervene in the lives of people.
ME: But the result is the same…6 of one or half dozen of the other.
YOU: Ron Paul for president, everyone else is a tyrant, you hate the constitution,lalalalalalala I’m not listening…lalalalalala.
ME: Wow.
George Patton
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 3:19pmAlso dungblood……i never said paul was an isolationsit. Colt brought that up as a straw man argument. I said paul doesn’t think we should defend israel
Colts response was that paul thinks we should have trade relations with other nations…so he’s not isolationist.
That has nothing to do with his position on israel. Arguing with paulbots is like arguing with libs…just one strawman after another.
ME: the sky is blue
Report Post »PAULBOT OR LIB: 1+1=2 so therefore you are wrong, pigs don’t fly
ME: what????
colt1860
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 8:29pm@Patton I’m not a Paulbot or liberal, I can think for myself. My answers are pretty clear. I think you’ve misread or misunderstood them. I think the mix up here is because of two simple words: should and must. There are many things we should do, in my opinion, but that we don’t have to or must do, as a Nation. That’s my point. Of course we should engage in War if it’s in our defense. The Jefferson quote is talking about foreign conflicts that basically have no affect to us here. To which I agree. My other point was irrelevant to that quote. I said, that if a Nation in need of our help (like our ally) does ask for our aid, and we constitutionally pass a Resolution to help them, first considering our own situation, then we should help, but that is solely up to us, as we don’t have a mandatory obligation to help. And yes, we usually do have some National interest with our Allies, so their dire needs may affect us somehow. However, we cannot destroy our own Nation to save another. So let’s clear this up. No, we should never engage in the foreign conflicts of another Nation, which have nothing to with us here. Yes, we should help out our Ally or friendly neighbor, if we have some sort of shared National interest (trade, workers, etc). Jefferson’s quote was talking about foreign conflicts that have no risk of affecting us here, wherein we have no shared interests. We have no shared interests with Muslim nations, wherefore who care’s if they kill off each other.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 8:32pm@Patton My arguments are not straw man arguments. I said that your Hypothetical question was based on an isolationist’s viewpoint. And it was. Therefore, why should I try to answer it if my position is not that of an isolationist’s. Stop saying I’m acting like a liberal. Stop with the name calling already. I’ve never said anything derogatory to you personally. When you say that Paul says we should not defend Israel, you say that with the implied meaning that we mean we should not support or be friends with Israel. Which is what many people misinterpret it to mean. Which is why I quoted Natenyahu, Beck and Gold. They themselves say Israel defends itself by itself. That is our stance also. Israel defends itself. It does not mean we hate them or don’t want to be friends.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 8:42pm@Patton Jefferson did not mean we should NEVER engage in foreign wars. He meant, as the rest of the founders adhered to, we should never engage in the internal affairs of other Nations, in foreign conflicts that have no affect to us here. It would be fine to engage in a foreign war if it was in our own Defense, to protect our interests and homeland. For the most part, our current wars, and some wars in these past 30-40 years, have had nothing to do with us here or our safety, here in the US. Look at our involvement in Libya. We had no interest over there. Yet, Obama sent aid there. To this, the founders said no to. I‘m not twisting Jefferson’s quote. You have misunderstood me, or I haven’t explained myself correctly. And stop accusing me of doing things, or assuming that I’m purposely misstating things. You can ask me question to clarify. Just don’t falsely imply a million things I never said.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 10:46pmThank you colt for finally agreeing with me that the Jefferson quote does not say we should never engage in foreign wars. Now please for the love all all that is good, come up with a better argument on why you oppose certain wars. The Jefferson quote is not a good defense of that position anymore. Please spead the word to all your paulbot friends to stop using it to support their position of being opposed to defeating evil in the world and defending israel. There are so many valid arguments as why we should not engage in certain wars…very credible reasons that I would most likely agree with.
Report Post »colt1860
Posted on December 2, 2011 at 12:59pm@Patton Thanks for the reply. I think the mix up or misuse of the quote is due to the complex wars we’re fighting or are trying to fight. For example; Iran. In one hand, we want to fight Iran to stop them from building a Nuke, and thus change their regime, and eventually do Nation building, like in Iraq. On the other hand, we want to fight Iran, because some believe that they are a threat to us or Israel, and that if they get a Nuke, they may use it against us and Israel. Then we have the mess in Afghanistan, wherein we favor some leaders, and try to change others, and so on, and so on. Likewise with other Nations nearby. I think the main point is this. All these Muslim or Arab Nations are so interconnected, not only because of their shared region, but also because of their beliefs and customs, that we will never be able to help or “fix” them. Either way, we’ll still be interfering in their internal affairs. They’re nations of continual war, and always have been. The quote gets thrown around for these reasons.
Putting national defense arguments aside, which is the mix up here. We will never be able to help out these foreign Nations, financially or militarily. Our differences are an improtant factor to consider in the results we seek. These Middle Eastern countries don’t share or bare any resemblemce to our heritage, faith or government.
You’re right, we should debate these issues more carefully. Unfortunately, all these wars usually get grouped together.
Report Post »TRONINTHEMORNING
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:10pmIf stuff happens as stated by Michele and Glenn, the hardest hit areas will be both coasts and all heavily populated cities. Borders will be problematic as well. That’s my guess at present.
Report Post »wbalzley
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:27pmActually the attack will come along the southern border. Iran has been making alliances among the dictators and drug-lords in Central / South America…
Report Post »phillipwgirard
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:00amNew York City, Washington, Boston, i believe not to mention military bases along the seaboard, just speculating, and im right between Boston and New York City
Report Post »Ghost2-7
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:50amI’ve thought about this… I believe it will be the west coast. Why? Besides all the military bases in Cali, what is in the northwest besides Lewis-mcchord? Nothing. What is in Alaska? Oil, lots of oil. With major conflict in the south, Alaska and Hawaii are free for the taking. And all troops in SK, Australia, and Japan are cut off and vulnerable.
Report Post »THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 5:40amPlease quit believing the media lies, the attack that we need to worry about is the attack on our liberties.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:03pm@thetruthshallmakeyoufree. Unbelievable. You are actually claiming the left wing media is feeding us stories about invaders and war and how we need to be prepared…you are kidding right? Here in reality the opposite of what you say is happening. The media is talking about celebrity marriages/divorces, not educating people on long term food storage. Yes the war against our liberty has been going before the ink on the constitution was dry, but that does not mean that is the only threat we face. You Paulbots are go to great lengths to ignore the world.
Report Post »THE TRUTH SHALL MAKE YOU FREE
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 2:27am@Goergepatton, i did not stutter sir, Al Queada the boogeyman, nkorea the boogeyman, irag,iran,libya,syria,yemen,egypt,russia,china, Have you not heard about these countries in the news? DONT LIE, And EVERYTIME we hear about them its always that they are trying to attack us in some way? Government propaganda to keep the American people in fear of their own shadows, When have you ever heard a positive story about ANY of these countries? Answer the question and dont lie……
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 2:33pmYou’re right truthshall; north korea, iran, and the other places you named are great places. The media has been lying to us…these places are actually paradises. I bet they are lying to us to keep it to themselves. I bet brian williams has a beach house in n. korea. I’m going to go wait by my mailbox now for my Christmas card from kim jong.
Report Post »TRONINTHEMORNING
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:06pmHey BROKER dude/dudette; whatever…What’s your hang-up? You seem tense.
Report Post »Mimi24
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:21amTron. Broker is a lost cause. Don’t feed him hon.
Report Post »ZeroOff4impact
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:06pmWell your either ready or you lose.
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:05pmHere we go with this Evil BS again, look a fake republican banging the war drums again, what else is new?
Report Post »RickWS
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:09pmLook, a “libertarian” who doesn’t think we need to protect ourselves and be prepared for evil…
Report Post »A Conservatarian
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:16pmI’m not a libertarian smart ass. I am tired of people in the world who would continually involve this nation in armed conflict to satisfy some twisted blood lust in an off-shot of republicanism that has nothing to do with being Republican nor being Conservative.
Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:33amIf we didn’t have liberal progs getting us into dangerous situations by wearing a big yellow ribbon which says, “I’m sorry my big brothers may have been mean and fought back, but I’m a new generation, take whatever you want!” ,we wouldn’t have to bang the war drums and let them see all our weapons now would we?
Report Post »LibertarianRight
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:02am@Mil Mom
It’s the liberals getting us into trouble because they are weak? That’s nonsense. The hatred of us in the Middle East stems entirely from two issues – our propensity for forcing regime change there, starting with the removal of a democratically elected government in Iran in 1953, and our unnecessary military bases staffed during times of peace (well, relative peace, anyway) on land Muslims consider to be theirs. They hate us because WE DON’T LEAVE THEM ALONE.
Governments, even those we disagree with, are sovereign nations and MUST BE RESPECTED AS SUCH. We don’t do that, instead demanding they do what we want, and the results are evident.
But you just keep pushing for taking civil liberties to fight needless wars. I just hope that a Democrat doesn’t get elected that sends you all to Gitmo for being “right-wing terrorists”. After all, once the NDAA, written by the “freedom loving” McCain, passes, that’s all it will take to hold American citizens indefinitely without charge – a classification as a “threat to America”, no PROOF required.
Report Post »Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:24am@LibertarianRight
Report Post »re : It’s the liberals getting us into trouble because they are weak? That’s nonsense. The hatred of us in the Middle East stems entirely from two issues – our propensity for forcing regime change there, starting with the removal of a democratically elected government in Iran in 1953, and our unnecessary military bases staffed during times of peace (well, relative peace, anyway) on land Muslims consider to be theirs. They hate us because WE DON’T LEAVE THEM ALONE
***
And the fact they state they want to return to the 7th century Caliphate when the dominated the world means they consider ALL lands to be theirs! Read their articles and interviews in foreign newspapers instead of depending on the lsm to inform you, You might be surprised to discover adminajhad has been saying for years that he believes it’s his duty to heat the world to 7000 degrees to hasten the return of the 13th imam. He‘s bragging he’s going to wipe Israel (the little satan) off the map and destroy America (the big satan). Not for our bases in muslim countries, but because the koran tells him to.
broker0101
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:02pmYears ago, Glenn Beck had a personal awakening. May at least some of you pitiful, mindless Followers do likewise someday.
Report Post »grayling646
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:21pm@ broker
Report Post »A quick check of history will prove that every great nation in the history of the world has fallen. Is it our time now? I don‘t know but what’s wrong with being prepared? Or maybe you think if it does happen you’ll just bum off of your neighbor. Good luck with that.
LoriGirl
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:00pmI admit it. My Conservative Dream Ticket is Michele Bachmann & Rick Santorum. This would send RINOS and establishment Rebubs running & screaming, and it would make ******* heads explode.
Report Post »Crakaveli
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:12pmThey would love it. Lots of endless war.
Report Post »Locked
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:12pmYour conservative ticket is to guarantee another 4 years of Obama? Interesting…
Report Post »grayling646
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:28pmWho was it that said, “The opposite of war isn’t peace, it’s slavery” who was that?
Report Post »staggerlee32
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:38am@LOCKED
Report Post »Who do you want CFR NEWT and Ubamneycare Mitt? ROFL wakeup Mr. Knowitall
Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:38am@LoriGirl
Report Post »Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:00pm
I admit it. My Conservative Dream Ticket is Michele Bachmann & Rick Santorum. This would send RINOS and establishment Rebubs running & screaming, and it would make ******* heads explode.
****
One question: “IS DUCT TAPE STILL MADE IN AMERICA OR WOULD WE BE AIDING THE CHICOMS ECONOMY WITH THE REMEDY???”
bhohater
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:52amI agree LORIGIRL.
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:29pmThe GOP, Fox News, etc. have declared Romney as the candidate. Try fighting that!
Report Post »How on earth will a candidate ever get the endorsement of the public, when the public never sees them on the right-wing media?
banjarmon
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:57pmBachmann…A Woman with a Good and Steady Message…Still my #1 choice!!!
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:14amHow does she have a steady message? She wants a smaller government but then implies that all should be required to own a gun, have a fallout shelter, and keep supplies of food. If everyone is required to do that, the government has more control over our lives. Is that what you want? Or is it just that you are ok with big government as long as it is in line with your values?
Report Post »JP16
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:38amBachmann, a steady message that liberty is allowed, as long as you live your life the way she says you should.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:20amHer only good and steady message is that she is crazy and uninformed.
Report Post »bhohater
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:55amMichelle is another “Iron lady.”
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:13am@godfather1….could you be any more dishonest? Bachmann is absolutely not claiming that government should provide you with a gun, a fallout shelter, and food and water. She’s telling people they should prepare themselves….she is absolutely not advocating that government should buy you a gun. Obviously you are another ron paul supporter making ron paul look bad. It’s a shame that one of the few advocates of liberty is marginalized and made to look crazy by his rude supporters. If ron paul supporters would shut their mouths ron paul would be more credible.
Report Post »rose-ellen
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:36pm“Her only good and steady message is that she is crazy and uninformed.”
Report Post »I can’t stop laughing over that.[And 23 foster children is not my idea of good mothering].
Godfather.1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:45pm@George Patton
Apparently you cannot read. She said that in Switzerland, everyone is required to have a gun, fallout shelter, and rations, which is exactly what I said. Nowhere did I say that she wants the government to provide it for you.
Furthermore, she is not advocating personal responsibility. Rather, she is stating that you should be required to have those things because you aren’t responsible.
Nice try at criticism, better luck next time. Try and read first.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:18pm@godfather…that is quite a stretch you are making. Just to be clear…clarity is more important than agreement. Are you saying you believe Michelle Bachmann would be in favor of passing laws that require Americans to buy guns, and build a bomb shelter. I do not believe she would be in favor of that. To believe that I would have to believe she has been lying about her stance against obamacare (because gov. can’t mandate you to buy something). So you believe Bachmann was saying she is in favor of passing a law mandating we buy bomb shelters and guns? ok got it…clear.
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:50pm@George Patton
It appears that you assume Bachmann wouldn’t contradict herself. She said that the those requirements are a model the US should think about adopting. If she said that people should get that stuff on her own she would have said that. Why would she point to another country‘s laws if she didn’t think those laws were something that should be implemented here?
This is not the first time she has contradicted herself on the big government issue. In her marriage pledge, it indicated that she would be in favor of banning porn, which would be another big government measure. Also, what is a federal ban on gay marriage if not a big government move?
Bachmann is not bright enough to keep her views consistent, that much is quite clear.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:03pmYou Paulbots are impossible. Obama is bad and so is Bachmann..blah blah…everyone is for tyranny, except paul….blah blah. The sad thing is you don‘t even correctly represent paul’s views….you have a strange twist of paul’s views which come to rest at a libertine view (which Paul opposes).
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:26pm@George Patton
Wrong again. I am not a Ron Paul fan, and I don’t know why you made that assumption.
But back to the point of the conversation, you still haven’t responded to the fact that Bachmann has always been inconsistent in her views. She wants a small federal government until she wants a large one.
Report Post »PainesGhost
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 8:06pmTo Godfather:
You have a hole in your mind. You perversely and falsely claim that MB would require everyone to have guns, bomb shelters and food storage. She never said that and you know it. You are no more honest in your discourse than the average liberal. Why must you try to twist words and start fights that don’t need to be?
And let me ask a question: If the government required that you own a firearm and be proficient with it, and advocated your personal responsibility for preparedness, does that constitute government control? Keep in mind that the Swiss government knows that all of its citizens are armed and WANTS it that way. That government will obey the will of the people because they can defend themselves against their government as well as alien forces.
Here, those that WANT the government in total control are stripping us of our rights to own guns little by little. So that when they decide to finally tell us that we are now slaves, we won’t be able to do anything about it.
The Founders advocated that everyone own a firearm and be proficient in using it. Not only to defend against foreign invasions, but also to keep our own government AFRAID OF THE PEOPLE. Your silly argument that everyone can be free as long as they own a gun and a bomb shelter and have food storage? DOPE!!! Who is more free, someone with all those things, or someone with NONE OF THEM who is unable to muster his own emergency food or shelter or to protect him/herself again
Report Post »Godfather.1
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 4:05am@PainesGhost
If all she was advocating was personal responsibility, then why did she use Switzerland as an example? Because Michele Bachmann clearly is not very smart, it is possible that‘s all she was doing and didn’t realize that using the Swiss example would give her argument a different tone. However, because she used an example where the government requires that everyone have those things, it is fair to say that she wants that here.
If the government requries that everyone have those things, that is government control. How do you not understand that? Whether it is the government telling you to buy health insurance or a gun, it is government control.
Tell me where the founding fathers said that everyone should own a gun and know how to use it, and don’t just say the Second Amendment.
Finally, even if everyone in the U.S. owned a gun, the U.S. military would still be much more powerful than the public. If you don’t understand that you are truly delusional.
Report Post »George Patton
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 3:04pm@painesghost…we have clarity. godfather claims that he honestly believes MB wants to pass a law mandating that Americans buy a gun and a bomb shelter. We cannot convince him otherwise, but at least his irrational position is on display. We have clarity. Persuasion will probably never happen because the position is obviously so irrational that logic will not overcome it. The display of his irrational position is the best that can be done. Just like with liberals, the best we can do is reveal their true beliefs….which is usually enough to persuade others not to go down that path.
Report Post »dealer@678
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:56pmAfter watching the show tonight im convinced to load up on food and water. The Michele comments convinced me once and for all. She knows something
Report Post »dholio
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:27pmI was just thinking the exact same thing…Sadly, I think being prepared for a total catstrophy is going to become a way of life for us.
Report Post »gdbhusker
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:56pmNice Bachman….real nice… We are BROKE!!!!!!!!!! and you are a war monger….there is no such thing as terrorism…without US involvement! think about that…. every “terrorist” that the US labels as a threat…oddly enough was a US plant for another region in the 80′s??? do you remember when we armed Iraq to the teeth and begged them to go to war with Iran? then we bomb Iraq? 19 hijackers from Saudi Arabia commit 9/11 and we bomb Iraq into submission..then head to Afghanistan ( vietnam the sequel) while creating war with everyone!!! jeesh.. none of these are DECLARED!!!! we say we are at world wide war with al queda wherever we find them..and yet we give them money and weapons to overthrow an elected foreign president of a sovereign nation…OMG why do Americans not get that WE have created this giant crap burger that we all have to take a giant bite out of… now we have syria, yemen, iran, tunisia, uganda…WHAT??? UGANDA???? did we not fight imperialism??? are we not a nation that loves peace and freedom?? Newt and Bachman believe that more freedom should be taken away from you to “protect”you from an invisible boogie man that we created… so go a head sheep and follow these war mongers right into the apocalypse…I say bring every single troop we have HOME.. then if someone gets froggy…. we eradicate them with the full force of our military in DEFENSE…not send small packages of retention troops to prolong and ramp up the military industrial complex…IDIO
Report Post »dealer@678
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:09pmThe occupy idiot zombies infiltrated The blaze
Report Post »broker0101
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:10pmJust when it seemed safe to say that the dumbest thing possible had been written on The Blaze Comment section by some mindless Beck-Bot, a whole new level of idiocy rears its ugly, yet hysterically funny, head. Nicely done, Moron!
Report Post »iwalkalone
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:16pmYou make good points but the country elected a man-child last time that was antiwar, going to close Gitmo, bring the troops home, calm the waters and make moslems love us, after all he went to paaawkeystaawwwn when he wasnt a citizen with a us passport on a druggie tour and became a foreign relations community organizing expert . But look how many wars he led from behind while alienating our only ally, Israel. I mean, if bowing and scraping to his secret benefactor from the house of Saud hasnt saved us, what can?
Report Post »After trying to prosecute bush for reading terrorist emails we are now going to have an end to posse commitatus and executive detention of citizens without trials. Which is a step up from his policy of murdering citizens abroad he deems terrorist. Why he wanted trials for bin laden when he was a candidate. Look at what the puppetmasters are making him do when in power.
Ron Paul makes more and more sense.
gdbhusker
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:29pmI am not an OCCUPY guy…. I post on here all the time….. and for all of you who now want war with IRAN.. guess what… that will be our death nail…. because they are with Russia and China…. Iran will talk a lot of trash and that is all…it makes them feel needed in the world… and by the way… I LOVE Israel…. they CAN and WILL defend themselves against any aggression… we CANNOT keep starting all of this and then offering the wrong solution to fix it… it is plain stinking perpetual war.. let me guess DEALER and BROKER….. they want to kill us because we are free and prosperous???? that is the most idiotic thing I have ever heard….you are the same type of people who want to bomb people into liking us…. we should stick to the constitution and trade friendly but that is IT!!! now I guess you will tell me that the world has changed..and that it is a dangerous place and the constitution couldn’t foresee using cell phones to kill people??? well think about this genius’s..if it has taken us 10 years to defeat guys hiding in caves who were killing our troops with rocks…what do you think the russians will do? they will launch and so will we and then the end has come…. I have hated liberalism my whole life… and now I have to give up my republican card because they all think alike… war mongers all!!! go Ron paul…….go Libertarianism!!! and go CONSTITUTION!!!!!!
Report Post »DAVIDTHETANK
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:43pmDealer@678 hit the nail on the head!!
Report Post »Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:46am@gdbhusker
Report Post »Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:56pm
Nice Bachman….real nice… We are BROKE!!!!!!!!!! and you are a war monger….there is no such thing as terrorism…without US involvement! think about that…. every “terrorist” that the US labels as a threat…oddly enough was a US plant for another region in the 80′s??? do you remember when we armed Iraq to the teeth and begged them to go to war with Iran? then we bomb Iraq? 19 hijackers from Saudi Arabia commit 9/11 and we bomb Iraq into submission..then head to Afghanistan ( vietnam the sequel) while creating war with everyone!!! jeesh.. none of these are DECLARED!!!! we say we are at world wide war with al queda wherever we find them..and yet we give them money and weapons to overthrow an elected foreign president of a sovereign nation…OMG why do Americans not get that WE have created this giant crap burger that we all have to take a giant bite out of… now we have syria, yemen, iran, tunisia, uganda…WHAT??? UGANDA????
***
Did you ever question why the founders made it so a POTUS could only serve 2 terms? The [we] you talk about wasn’t just 1 administration, and as each one causes more problems attempting to solve the last, would you have us simply be destroyed because we elected someone who got it wrong?
Freedom is still the greatest form of government, and most would take it away from us, by force OR subversion!! We have to be diligent in both ways!
Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:51am@iwalkalone
Report Post »re : After trying to prosecute bush for reading terrorist emails we are now going to have an end to posse commitatus and executive detention of citizens without trials. Which is a step up from his policy of murdering citizens abroad he deems terrorist. Why he wanted trials for bin laden when he was a candidate. Look at what the puppetmasters are making him do when in power.
Ron Paul makes more and more sense
****
And when everything gets tense, Ron Paul doesn’t care how much dope you smoke to calm your nerves!
Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:34am@gdbhusker
Report Post »Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:29pm
I am not an OCCUPY guy…. I post on here all the time….. and for all of you who now want war with IRAN.. guess what… that will be our death nail…. because they are with Russia and China
***
For a minute there I thought maybe you thought like Michelle Bachmann, isn’t that just what this article is about!
Those trash talkers have been supplying Hezbollah and the Syrians with weapons to attack Israel with for many years now! If you truly support Israel, you’d be in favor of a strong stance against them! They don’t do it themselves usually, they just weaponize the fanatics closer to their enemy. In our case it’d be Mexico and Vezuela.
Godfather.1
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:54am@Mil Mom
You are an idiot. The founding fathers didn’t create term limits. It was not until the 22nd Amendment, which was passed in 1951, that term limits were enacted. Learn your history before you go criticizing others.
Report Post »gdbhusker
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:08am@ mil mom……… Do you think FDR would have been able to serve for life had he not died??? after FDR we realized the dangers of letting someone serve as long as they can…..and put in term limits….now progressives like Clinton want that to change… they want 2 consecutive terms..followed by a four year sit-out….and then be eligible for eight more years……..
Report Post »Vechorik
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:35pm…and don’t forget, Gingrich said we need to invade CUBA and topple that regime! Whatever happened to international lines? America’s surely is wide open. Guess international law doesn’t matter anymore.
Report Post »Rechercar
Posted on December 1, 2011 at 7:05pm@Mil Mom – you need to get your facts straight.
“Those trash talkers have been supplying Hezbollah and the Syrians with weapons to attack Israel with for many years now! …They don’t do it themselves usually, they just weaponize the fanatics closer to their enemy. In our case it’d be Mexico and Vezuela.”
Mexico and Venezuela are predominantly Catholic nations. Hezbollah answers to Iran only because the Ayatollah, the leader of Shia Islam, is in Iran. They don’t and do not answer to Achmadinejad. For Iran to set up militias like Hezbollah in South America, they’d need to convert a Catholic country to Shia Islam.
Good luck with that.
This is insane – we’re discussing whether or not to go to war, something that will kill many an innocent American serviceman. If you can’t get basic facts right, don’t talk about it. The little details are important.
(Also, Syria has its own weapons and isn’t a dependent of Iran; they’re allies.)
(Also, Iran didn‘t ’make’ Hezbollah – they rose to power only because they were the only group able to drive the Israelis out of Lebanon.)
Report Post »iwalkalone
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:56pmI like Ms bachman a great deal. She rivals Neuter in smarts IMHO. Given the opportunity to go outside the soundbite based “debates” she shows some moral fiber and financial understanding. Glenn did a great little interview with her. If Ron Paul could get a similar opportunity to express his ideas I think he would win over some of his detractors as well.
Oh well though, I am always on the unpopular side of things. Thats why I got rid of cable tv, havent liked any new show since 1972. Music, dont even ask.
Report Post »Jefferson
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:54pmThis woman would be dangerous if anyone with half a brain took her seriously.
Fear, fear, fear,fear, terror, terror, terror!!
Boogie man gonna get you!!
2004 National Safety Council Estimates:
– You are 17,600 times more likely to die from heart disease than from a terrorist attack
– You are 12,571 times more likely to die from cancer than from a terrorist attack
– You are 11,000 times more likely to die in an airplane accident than from a terrorist plot involving an airplane
– You are 1048 times more likely to die from a car accident than from a terrorist attack
–You are 404 times more likely to die in a fall than from a terrorist attack
– You are 87 times more likely to drown than die in a terrorist attack
– You are 13 times more likely to die in a railway accident than from a terrorist attack
–You are 12 times more likely to die from accidental suffocation in bed than from a terrorist attack
–You are 9 times more likely to choke to death on your own vomit than die in a terrorist attack
–You are 8 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than by a terrorist
–You are 8 times more likely to die from accidental electrocution than from a terrorist attack
– You are 6 times more likely to die from hot weather than from a terrorist attack
Quit acting like a bunch of scared lemmings.
Report Post »“Those who give up essential liberties for some temporary safety, deserve neither liberty OR safety.” Ben Franklin
gdbhusker
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:59pmnicely said……. then franklin said they gave us a REPUBLIC ( not a democracy like ALL of our idiot leaders say) if we can keep it….. seems it has slipped out of our hands now!!! how sad
Report Post »Walkabout
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:16pm“on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, giving her a new role as overseer of the Central Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency and the rest of the U.S. intelligence community.” -wiki
Michelle gets more intel than you do. I have talked to some intel guys & it was not good.
Look at this way, anything that would be a good fallout shelter would also be a good tornado shelter. It would also make a good panic room. A place where gun-fearers could run & hide from burglars rapists & rioters because they don’t dare shoot. All in all a fallout shelter is a good investment. Much of the country is subject to tornadoes. Also civil unrest a la Rodney King or the riots of the 60s is also possible. If you were away from your family do you want them to have a hardened refuge to retreat to or do you want them to perfume themselves & makes themselves ready?
When Iran has a few operational nukes they are going to change their tune. I would hate to be you.
Report Post »chickenfried
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:16pmJust when you thought you’d seen it all…here you come with some bureaucratic made-up statistics from the National Safety Council. I feel safer already knowing the Safety Council thinks that I’m 8 times more likely to get shot by a cop than die in a terrorist attack. YOU GOTTA BE KIDDIN’ ME, MAN.
How about all you police officers out there correct this for me. I gotta write my Congressman and tell him to defund the National Safety Council. Someone there is wasting my tax money….
Report Post »Walkabout
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:19pmYou obviously don’t fly frequently. Also you assume that current rates of terrorism apply that they won’t increase.
Why don’t you take a vacation at the Isla de Margarita in 2 years time. You can be the 1st to know :)
Report Post »sensibleadult
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:20pmBet the 3000 on 9-11 would disagree, as well as the ones killed at Fort Hood.
Report Post »wbalzley
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:21pm@GBHusker: We were given a DEMOCRATIC Republic–as opposed to a Plutocracy. Our Founding Fathers oftern used the words Democracy, and Republic interchangeably.
Report Post »Walkabout
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:24pmOne more thing, you are no Thomas Jefferson. He had Qurans printed up because he wanted to learn about the enemy. The Muslims that attacked American merchant ships without provocation.
When TJ asked the ambassador why the Libyan pirates were attacking Americans, the ambassador told him it was their duty as Muslims. So TJ had the Qurans printed.
What the pirates of Somalia are doing today happened before to America. Local communities raised ransom money in church to buy the freedom of sailors from the pirates of Libya & Tunisia. Those are the good ole day that you want to go back to.
Report Post »grayling646
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:33pmWell, hell I didn’t know all that. Let’s get rid of our military and law enforcement. Seems we don’t have anything to worry about from terrorists.
Report Post »Jefferson
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:34pm@CHICKENFRIED
Tell that to the dead Marine who just got shot 20+ times by an AZ SWAT team.
I also have friends in “intel,“ that ”know more than you” do, and their common sense AND intel tells them, that Iran is NOT a threat to the US or Israel.
Report Post »Even if Iran HAD a nuke, which they are not even close to. Do you think they would actually use their ONE nuke against Israel’s 250+ nuclear warheads?
Do you ACTUALLY think they would nuke the Palestinians who are right next door?
They don’t even have a DELIVERY system, and have to import their own GASOLINE.
They have no Air Force, or Navy.
Get a grip.
It’s not just some “safety committee” telling you that the chances are slim, it’s the CIA, and military as well. Not some BS IAEA report.
Nothing short of a full scale ground invasion would stop a nuclear program. Russia and China have already warned about attacking them. Several countries STILL do business with Iran. Sanctions are NOT going to hurt them.
Time for a reality check. There are no Muslims hiding under your bed.
grayling646
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:50pmAll this debate about terrorism is moot. I have a friend in the CC (Chicken Coop) who tells me the sky is falling.
Report Post »Jefferson
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:15am@WALKABOUT
Report Post »Is that the best you’ve got? You might as well come up with a “mom joke” to elevate your level of discourse.
I’m well aware of the Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and yes I do want to go back to those good ole CONSTITUTIONAL days , where we used specialized units to go after bad people, rather be in the business of Nation building.
Do you even KNOW why the Somali “pirates” started hijacking boats? It wasn’t because they were muzluhms and wanted to see the 72 virgins.
It’s was because several different countries were dumping nuclear and other toxic waste in their territorial waters, and it was washing up on their shores making them sick and killing them. Other countries were trawling with giant boats and scooping up all their fish, taking their livelihood.
It’s a little CIA term called “blowback.” Study up on it, and you might have a better grasp on what is going on in the Middle East, and Africa.
Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:03am@jefferson
Report Post »re : % more likely to …….terrorist attack!
****
AND FOR EACH OF THOSE STATISTICS YOU CAN THANK GEORGE W BUSH!!! If he hadn’t taken the battle to foreign shores, you’d have seen what goes on in Iraq, and Afghanistan, and is a daily threat in Israel, here on our shores! REMEMBER THE INSURGENTS, RECRUITED IN MUSLIM COUNTRIES WORLDWIDE THAT WERE SHOWING UP DAILY ON THE STREETS OF IRAQ, AND THIS WEEKS STORIES SAY THEY ARE NOW GOING TO AFGHANISTAN INSTEAD! They’re out to kill Americans, it‘s just they’re doing it in muslim countries, and not getting away with it often here. (Probably more in answer to prayer than because we’re so well protected.)
Welcome Black Carter
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 7:57amYour math does not consider the attacks will one day be as commonplace as in Israel…
Report Post »You can put your head in the sand or identify the enemy and be part of the solution.
Prepare yourself to meet in the valley, choose which side you would fight, and die for.
The truth has no agenda…
bhohater
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:03pmRight Jefferson, we have absolutely nothing to fear from terrorists but fear itself. Yeah, though I walk through the valley of suicide bombers, IED’s and nukes I shall fear no evil.
Report Post »bhohater
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 6:33pmThanks for that good information information, I will definitely sleep better tonight. It’s comforting to know that there is absolutely no need to worry about terrorists. Yeah, though I walk through the valley of suicide bombers, IED’s and nukes I shall fear no evil. Getting run over by a train or struck by lightening still worries me though..
Report Post »conservativeBC
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:53pmBACHMANN STARTING TO MAKE GAINS IN IOWA CAUCUS POLL
Report Post »http://conservativeblogscentral.blogspot.com/2011/11/michele-bachmann-starting-to-rise-in.html
Bakko Bomma
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:52pmBachmann is an insane religious zealot that would love nothing more then to think she helped set off Armageddon and forced the return of JC. Santorum is almost as bad.
Report Post »chickenfried
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:06pmNope.
She is a Conservative Christian who weeps for the sad state our once great nation has devolved into, and she is eager to grab the wheel and get us back on course. The poor fools who don’t recognize this might as well join with you and make ridiculous accusations founded in ignorance and jealousy.
Report Post »Bakko Bomma
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 11:12pmGo back on your meds.
Report Post »JLGunner
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 9:43amChicken you are dead on.
Report Post »ZengaPA65
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 10:35amAt least two people dont know very much about Michelle Bachmann and neither of them has a monkey picture.
Report Post »patriot50
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:23pmyou are an idiot unless you have something constructive to say shut your mouth and open your ears we are in this together and if you think that things are going well now your already lost so go back to sleep and get out of the way
Report Post »staggerlee32
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:52pmNone of the other candidates are talking like this.
Report Post »Mil Mom
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 3:14amMaybe that‘s proof that she’s the one who’d make the best POTUS! She cares enough to warn the American people we’re in for a tough time!
Report Post »UrsaMajor
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 4:17amToo bad she didn’t back up her talk and take a stand with Israel *IN* Israel. She chose to stay in the safety of the campaign trail just like all of the other Career Politician candidates.
Some “leadership”.
Report Post »korbin
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:52pmShe has a bigger nutt sack than most if not all male leaders. She is logical, and understands our basic rights. Every house should have those items needed to be pre parted, but FEMA would rather back charge the Government for services rendered aftermath than to assist with Americans preparing. I can‘t legally pour chase US MRE’s, I would if made available. Nope if FEMA hands them post event then they can justify the 500$ per meal to tax payers. We all should own a firearm or two, and be trained on safety, control and various scenarios.
Report Post »chickenfried
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:46pmThe next president ought to open the State of the Union address in this way…(and I’m typing in my best Reaganesque voice, by the way)
“My fellow Americans, we are so screwed….”
Report Post »neverending
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 12:06pmAnd you are so right!
Report Post »cyclops
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:44pmSo this is official? MB is being endorsed by GB? Good for you GB…….
Report Post »circleDwagons
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:59pmdid he have dinner alone with her? what did he see?
Report Post »dealer@678
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:43pmI watched that interview and now see what Beck sees
Report Post »dealer@678
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:49pmBut she cant win and that bothers me
Report Post »broker0101
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:59pmPerhaps someday you will be able to see what YOU see, although I strongly doubt it. Sad little Follower.
Report Post »HAPPYRWE
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 11:00amShe’s a nice lady, why on earth has Beck turned his back on Ron Paul who has the numbers has the stellar Conservative record, talks the talk and walks it too, is 100% pro Constitution Founding Fathers, and stands for Israel’s sovereignty and for power in Israel protecting herself, do we all think we can stop Armageddon if it’s beginning…? With the Government run Media covering nothing of Paul compared to everyone else….why is Paul being ignored by Beck?
Didn‘t Michelle vote for the Patriot act and run with Progressive in sheep’s clothes McCain. I am so confused. All of these “GOP” hopefuls are pulling us apart, who cares who the GOP ultimately chooses. Vote for the right person. Is the government going to shut down voting? Why does the majority of soldiers pull for Paul, they are sick and tired of being used and killed in global warring.
Where has common sense gone. Why is Beck not telling us what he knows. I love GBTV but it does not match up with not supporting Paul.
Anyone with a clearer vision than I have please help me out. Ron Paul is not weird or out of touch he is the Radical Right answer to the Radical Left Agenda that will topple this nation? The Founders were Radical in that they understood Freedom and morality….they stood up to tyranny with bold ideas…..How is Michelle Bachman the one for the Job what does she know that we don’t know already? If she ran under Paul/Bachman ticket I could understand….???
Report Post »Detroit paperboy
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:42pmI think the new axis of EVIL is , Harry “ the douchebag ” Reid … Hillary“ big hairy nutsack” Clinton… And Barack ” closet marxist/ homosexual ” Obama…. Those are the enemies who are destroying America……
Report Post »fatjack
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:59pmwuhahahahahahahahha
Report Post »I would have added to that statement, but dang you didn’t leave me any words to add.
skurk
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 2:47pmYou can remove the “closet”
Report Post »Dug2Dark
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:41pmAxis of Evil = obama, reid, pelosi. Need I say more????????
Report Post »CatB
Posted on November 29, 2011 at 10:43pmYes .. the enemy within …
Report Post »AmeriCat
Posted on November 30, 2011 at 1:40pmIndeed, those and scores more.
Report Post »We must remember the role of Warren-Buffet,
Google’s power hungry creators
and even Boehner, among others,..in his weakness, lack of integrity,
and needy yearning to get along.