Opinions and musings on religion, philosophy, science, politics, and life from a conservative Catholic neurosurgeon.
That man was a scapegoat for the Obama Administration's failures. When a terror attack happens, we now arrest the people who made the terrorists mad, while the actual terrorists skate. That's just life in Obama's America. Recall this police officer, Wesley Cheeks, Jr., who threatened to arrest a town hall protestor because he didn't like his sign. Presumably, the charge would have been trespassing, but other sign holders were on the same property, and they weren't being arrested. He asks the cop why he can't be there too, with his sign, and the cops says "because I just said so." The cop tells him that he can "charge [him] with whatever he wants to.""This used to be America!" the protestor responds."It ain't no more, okay?"http://michellemalkin.com/2009/08/28/video-of-the-week-it-aint-america-no-more-okay/That's for sure.The Torch
Torch:I agree. The arrest of this poor guy was an outrage-- akin to a show trial in a totalitarian state. It's hard to believe that this could happen here, but, as you said, this is Obama's America, and things are different. There's no objective mainstream media to keep things honest, and I hope the alternative media (Fox)and the blogsphere is up to the job.I've never been ashamed of my country, and afraid for my country, before this. Scary stuff.
"This used to be America!" the protestor responds."It ain't no more, okay?"That about sums it up. TRISH
I went to one of those townhall meetings in 2009. The whole thing was a big dog and pony show, intended to give the illusion that they actually wanted to hear what the people had to say. It was supposed to look like a conversation, as if they wanted feedback. They most certainly did not. That's why they bussed in supporters from outside the district. Another trick they tried is having everyone write their questions down on cards rather than asking them directly. Then they went through the cards and eliminated tough questions. When the townhall was over, they claimed they just didn't get to the other questions. Like mine, for example. Oops! Were's out of time! It was a big sham.The purpose of the townhall was not to debate whether government should delve deeper into health care, but how far. Anyone who, like me, believed that there is entirely too much governmental involvement in the health care sector was basically ignored. That's why some people had to raise their voices--to be heard. I wasn't one of them. I left my townhall in disgust, but I didn't end up yelling on the nightly news. Maybe I should have. I believe Harry Reid called those people "evil mongers" and Nancy Pelosi called them "un-American." High praise coming from those creeps.Supposedly they were angry that the townhall protestors were being disruptive. Well, sort of. They were disrupting the coreographed "debate" between people who want more governmental involvement in health care and people who want a complete takeover. They seemed to be saying that a debate is not possible with all of these irksome protestors, which came as a surprise to irksome protestors like me who thought that a debate involved two sides. No, the organizers of the townhall debates were not interested in having a conversation. They were interested in shutting down a conversation. Maybe that's why poll after poll shows Obamacare to be unpopular. http://hotair.com/archives/2011/08/30/poll-obamacare-at-its-most-unpopular-among-the-uninsured/Little John
Whoa there, Little John! Sounds like a weird "conspiracy theory!" Obama and his fawning congressmen didn't want to hear what you had to say? Impossible. Take off the tin foil hat!The Torch
Nancy Pelosi can't be upset because the protestors were being disruptive. Not that they were being disruptive, they simply showed up for a debate and expected to have one. But she can't be upset about people being disruptive, because I know that she loves disrupters. She even said so in 2006. I’m a fan of disrupters, people who make change.She also said, So let’s not question each other’s patriotism when we have this very honest debate that our country expects and deserves.She was talking about the Iraq War at the time, and her party was out of power. That's the difference. When her party is in power, she doesn't like disrupters quite so much, and they are definitely "un-American." And let's not forget that she accused to protestors of carrying swastikas. I think we should commit Nancy to a nice padded room with a view of San Francisco Bay. Ben
Dr Egnor: this outrage is almost as bad as Franco's Spain! Oh, wait..Ben
But not nearly as bad as the Spain of Franco's enemies.Commies always look better dead than alive. You always forget the the real world is choices, Ben.
Why has there been no "pressure-cooker-control" rhetoric??
They're only going after the high-capacity pressure cookers.
A man at Lone Star College recently stabbed fourteen people. He wanted to kill a bunch more people but the knife broke. http://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Student-Suspect-said-goal-was-killing-spree-but-4421291.phpI immediately thought to myself, when are we going to get some sensible knife control laws in this country? We have a real problem with knives. How many more people have to die senselessly before we start a knife registry, have background checks for cutlery, and a three day waiting period? We also need to close that culinary show loophole and tax the living crap out of them. Al Sharpton, speaking in the wake of the Newtown atrocity, said knife control comes next. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/randy-hall/2013/01/02/al-sharpton-claims-knife-control-may-follow-restrictions-guns Joey
Oh yes, and publish the addresses of knife owners in the newspaper! Joey
Joey, as horrible as the knife attack was, nobody died. Things would have been much worse if there had been a gun involved.-KW
"Joey, as horrible as the knife attack was, nobody died. Things would have been much worse if there had been a gun involved."I get it! "Things would have been much worse if there had been a gun [in the hands of one of the victims or some other citizen]" ... Goodness! the criminal might have been killed!
Ilion,I have wondered about you for some considerable time. Whether you're dishonest or just stupid. This last comment of yours removes all doubt from my mind. You're both.
On the other hand, 'bachfiend' is simply intellectually dishonest -- it doesn't matter what the subject, there is a strong chance that he will lie in some way.