Notice: Forums will be shutdown by June 2019

To focus on better serving our members, we've decided to shut down the POF forums.

While regular posting is now disabled, you can continue to view all threads until the end of June 2019. Event Hosts can still create and promote events while we work on a new and improved event creation service for you.

Thank you!

Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch      Home login  
Joined: 12/13/2006
Msg: 1726
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tchPage 70 of 90    (50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90)
All the people I know who got insurance under ACA got lower premiums if they'd been insured before. Quite a few got insurance for the first time in years.

Where *I* noticed a huge jump was after Bush's Medicare Part D-- which quadrupled what I was paying for meds, overnight. My pharmacist said that had happened to a lot of their customers. So I'm sure that Big Pharma which wrote it was tickled pink!


And Irish, Thanks!
Joined: 12/13/2006
Msg: 1727
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 1:18:47 PM
I thought the President did wonderfully well last night--but judging from Rumpleshmoopyskin's reaction, he must have done even better than I dreamed, lol!
* * * * * * * * *
This is fascinating--old but relevant. Live links at the original.

{quote] Drunken GOP Sailors
In 2003, Republican Sen. John McCain criticized fellow lawmakers for "spending money like a drunken sailor." Among other things, McCain lamented a $31 billion national energy bill would largely fund industry tax breaks. "The numbers are astonishing....Congress is now spending money like a drunken sailor. And I've never known a sailor drunk or sober with the imagination that this Congress has." That was 2003, this is 2006.

Here's a headline from the Wall Street Journal, January 2004:

Drunken GOP Sailors Even Bill Clinton and a Democratic Congress didn't spend like this.

Here is conservative radio personality Tammy Bruce in September 2005:

Bush Is Spending Like a Drunken Sailor! While I love the president, and have no qualms putting my safety in his hands when it comes to dealing with the War on Radical Islam, I certainly would never give him my wallet when it comes to domestic issues.

For those of you who are wondering how conservatives (McCain and the Wall Street Journal are conservative, I believe) are reacting to the Bush regime's current 2006 spending spree and the Congress' pork barrel largesse, one needs to look no further than the Heritage Foundation to see how disconcerted some conservatives are by the behavior of these drunken sailors.

In a section there website, the Heritage Foundation has a page entitled Appropriations Watch which is prefaced this way:

"These pages demonstrate that during budget season lawmakers and lobbyists operate with a mindset that no federal government spending is bad government spending.
It all adds up. Pork-barrel spending continues to grow when defense needs are a priority, and lawmakers ignore the best way to create short-term and long-term stimulus for the economy: accelerating President Bush's tax cuts, and returning more money to the taxpayers."

So no less a conservative think-tank than the Heritage Foundation has pretty much had it with a Congress (controlled by Republicans) which is lobbied to excess by corporate interests (mostly Republican) which strong-arm the pork and the earmarks, and a Republican administration that knee-jerk approves it all.

Of course, it's not clear when they say so generically:

"...the best way to create short-term and long-term stimulus for the economy: accelerating President Bush's tax cuts, and returning more money to the taxpayers."

Are they suggesting that the tax cuts for the wealthy should be expanded to include more substantially the not-so-wealthy? Or are they merely suggesting that the current tax cuts for the wealthy should be made permanent?

It's all so mysterious, because on other pages of their website, the Heritage Foundation decries the out-of-control budget, the negative influences of lobbyists and special interests, and the disastrous effects of such a huge budget deficit.

On one page, Brian M. Riedl, Grover M. Hermann Fellow in Federal Budgetary Affairs in the Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage Foundation (whew!), proposes Six Budget Reforms to Restrain Lobbyists and Special Interests. (It is reassuring that people at the Heritage Foundation are actually worrying about these kinds of things.)

Riedl proposes the following (for more detail, read the actual piece cited above): 1. Ban Pork Projects; 2. If Pork Remains, Add Sunshine; 3. Make all Federal Grants Public; 4. Term-Limit Appropriators; 5. Rewrite the Outdated 1974 Congressional Budget Act; 6. Enact a Federal TaxpayersÂ’ Bill of Rights.

Notice how from number one to number two, he allows for the possibility that banning pork may be an impossible task, so in number two he pleads for openness, for disclosure. He seems to be saying -- hey, if you are going to keep stealing taxpayer money for your little projects, at least let's make it clear who is doing the stealing and for what. Like that is actually going to happen.

It's worth taking a look at the pork barrel spending increases in Federal Spending Bills since 1995:

2005 - 13,997
2004 - 10,656
2003 - 9,362
2002 - 8,341
2001 - 6,333
2000 - 4,326
1999 - 2,838
1998 - 2100
1997 - 1,596
1996 - 958
1995 - 1439

The drunken sailors are clearly winning.

Riedl also authors a piece entitled "New CBO Baseline Substantially Understates Grim Budget Picture" (January 27, 2006) which begins this way:

"The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects a balanced budget by 2012. A number of CBOÂ’s assumptions underlying this projection are, to say the least, problematic. For example, CBOÂ’s projections assume that all of the PresidentÂ’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, as well as all other temporary tax cuts, are allowed to expire and that the Alternative Minimum Tax is not fixed before it digs further into middle-class incomes. CBO is also required by law to assume that there will be no more appropriations for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and for Gulf Coast reconstruction; that the pending reconciliation budget will have no effects; and that discretionary spending will not grow at all, in inflation-adjusted terms. With all these caveats in place, CBOÂ’s budget baseline is extremely unrealistic."

"Extremely unrealistic" and "grim budget picture" are not words the Heritage Foundation uses lightly in criticizing a Republican budget. Riedl sums up his concerns: 1. Budget deficits are far larger than CBO projects; 2) Tax revenues are not the problem; 3) Runaway spending is the problem; 4) Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are out of control; 5) Halving the deficit by 2009 will be difficult, but it is the long-term deficit that matters more; and 6) Net interest spending is growing.

The DailyKos, who has inspired my piece, concludes about all this:

While the deficits are a clear result of Bush's tax cuts, Heritage would rather see a different solution -- drastic spending cuts. But given the size of these budget deficits, cuts from the discretionary budget won't do the trick.
In 2004, we had $895 billion in discretionary spending, including $454 billion in defense spending. That means that we had $441 billion in non-defense discretionary spending.
Our budget deficit in 2004 was $412 billion. So without raising revenues, our nation would literally have to eliminate the entire defense department (which ain't gonna happen) or its entire non-defense discretionary spending to simply balance the budget. That's not including the $4.3 TRILLION in debt we current hold and should really be trying to pay off.
Heritage knows this because its solution is much harsher -- cut social security, Medicare, and Medicaid entitlements.
We are seeing Grover Norquist's "drown the government" strategy in action.
But remember, we weren't in this mess before Bush irresponsibly cut taxes and engaged uunnecessaryssary foreign entanglements.
Joined: 4/18/2014
Msg: 1728
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 2:40:10 PM
Awesome State of the Union address last night. Your President looked very....presidential and in control. I even liked the odd little joke he threw in there. And not once with a "Y'all, I can see Russia from my porch". He was very classy, you should be proud.
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 1729
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 2:57:14 PM

Awesome State of the Union address last night. Your President looked very....presidential and in control. I even liked the odd little joke he threw in there. And not once with a "Y'all, I can see Russia from my porch". He was very classy, you should be proud.

I agree.

Even though I thought George Bush was dumb as a box-O-rocks, was a figure head while Cheney actually ran the country, lied about the reasons to invade Iraq, drove the country to the brink of financial ruin, and doubled the national debt while giving massive tax breaks to the wealthy...well, he was my President for better or worse.

That treasonous seditionist is the real traitor of this wonderful country...he should stop drinking during the day...get a real job...and move out of mom's house (and leave her possessions alone)
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 1730
view profile
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 3:13:30 PM
Netanyahu should be tried as a war criminal. His bombing campaign last summer killed many trapped, innocent children and their families, this should definitely qualify as terrorism. Strange to see only the U.S., Canada and a few small countries that depend on the west don't care to see a trial.

Those with Hamas that bomb citizens, should be put on trial as well.

When we ask for a trial, we are labeled anti Semitic even though it is greed that is the problem, nothing to do with the jewish people who aren't greedy. Some jewish people agree that the zionists in control are radicals and are refusing to bomb for them.

The greedos in the world want to keep all the goods, the only way to fight them is to accept that those who have too much at the expense of others are users and we should not support them no matter what hat they wear. Boycotting they listen to. Refusing to fight for them will stop them.

If the icc doesn't manage to put Nat on trial, shit will hit the fan. Lets put our criminals on trial as well and show the world our hypocrite days are over. Maybe then we'll have peace.

Statism is the biggest reason people will go to war. Religion is just how they sell it. When the people see that the borders are not the real issue so much as territory and people to exploit, then maybe humanity can stand against exploitation and peace will have a chance.

Obama can help turn the tide, will he is the question.
Joined: 6/16/2007
Msg: 1731
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 3:26:49 PM
I'm not certain that cheap college education automatically "raises all boats". Making associates' degrees as common as high school degrees may do exactly what happens to high school degrees...make them less valuable on your resume. On the flip side, I doubt Silicon Valley and the Route 128 tech corridor in Massachusetts began in liberal states that promoted college education by accident.

On the other hand, those who ask, "how does taxing the rich so they can have an educated labor force help the rich?" never seem to ask, "why can't we conservatives realize that border fence ain't gonna build itself. Someone's gotta pay to keep all them immie-granters out. Why should we penalize the rich by raising their taxes to pay for our defenses against all them people coming in to vote Democrat like any Roman Catholic against abortion would do?"

then again, i'm always amazed those who claim to have a long memory about those who've done wrong to the US...for some reason forget this little ship called the USS Liberty and what happened to it in 1967.
Joined: 8/20/2014
Msg: 1732
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 3:48:25 PM
Funny how liberals offer anecdotes as if they have value...all the people you know got lower premiums..really? What is there deductible now? Or did they get subsidies at the expense of others?
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 1733
view profile
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 3:51:54 PM
The rich should pay because they are the ones who profited and still profit through explotation. Corporate welfare, tax dodges, low taxes, wall street scams and insider trading, hiring of people and paying them low wages, off shore accounts, bail outs, financing coups, NGO lobbyists...

Why shouldn't they pay?
Joined: 10/24/2014
Msg: 1734
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 4:05:31 PM

The rich should pay because they are the ones who profited and still profit through explotation. Corporate welfare, tax dodges, low taxes, wall street scams and insider trading, hiring of people and paying them low wages, off shore accounts, financing coups, NGO lobbyists...

Why shouldn't they pay?

if you don't like being poor then become rich yourself if it's so easy.

for myself I always had several businesses that I had to tend to and I did that all the way into my 50's. now I can relax poolside or at the beach and do what I want to do. why would you punish me for being successful?

That treasonous seditionist is the real traitor of this wonderful country...he should stop drinking during the day...get a real job...and move out of mom's house (and leave her possessions alone)

i'll be thinking of you as I loll on the waves in my 50 ft cabin cruiser with my gin and tonic in Tampa Bay with a young hottie wrapping herself around me.
Joined: 12/13/2006
Msg: 1735
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 4:15:51 PM
eto--*Everyone* who uses their insurance uses it at the cost to others who had nothing to claim on their insurance. EVERYONE. And it's always been that way. You get subsidized one way or t'other.

I was a self payer for a decade, and they (the medical establishment/hospitals/etc) charged me many times more than they charged the insurance companies. Not my idea of fair, but there you go. Paying a cardiologist $500 for seven minutes of his time to look at an echocardiogram is also not my idea of fair wages. But again, there you go: this is 'Murica, eh?

I would have preferred a single payer system, and just cut the insurance companies out of it. But I didn't get that, eh? Insurance companies add nothing, and offer nothing, just gather fees. Medicare for all is a brilliant concept, and hope it comes down the pipeline soon.
Joined: 11/28/2014
Msg: 1736
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 4:18:16 PM
Pres Obama says "shadow of crisis has passed", (HUH????) he will not say the words "radical Islamic terrorists".

The SOTU was like all of them, a cheerleading get together. He wants to veto and he keeps moving that red line in the sand in so many things he "promises to do", Iran being one of them(yawn).

The person who stole the night was Michelle Obama, she looked stunningly in that outfit. A very classy woman!
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 1737
view profile
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 4:28:58 PM
tgif: you are not even close to being part of the rich. Well off from exploting seems to be ok with you. Tending to business isn't like actually doing the work. Did you offer profit sharing? a Fair wage? What punishment are you referring to?

btw, Exploting a young" hottie " is nothing to brag about.
Joined: 11/28/2014
Msg: 1738
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 4:31:12 PM
Washington (CNN)—A heated exchanged between President Barack Obama and Sen. Robert Menendez (D-New Jersey) broke out Thursday over whether the U.S. should impose new sanctions on Iran amid ongoing negotiations over the country's nuclear program, according to two senators who were in the room.

Menendez, the leading Democrat pushing for additional sanctions against Iran, forcefully pressed Obama on the need for additional sanctions during a meeting in which Obama urged Menendez and other senators to drop their efforts to pass sanctions legislation. Additional sanctions, Obama argued, could torpedo ongoing negotiations over Iran's nuclear program.

The unusually sharp exchange, between a senior senator and a president from his own party, occurred during a Senate Democratic retreat at a hotel in Baltimore. A senior administration official also confirmed details of the exchange, which was first reported by the New York Times.

Obama said that as a former senator himself, he understood how outside forces -- like special interests and donors -- can influence senators to act, one of the senators recounted.

That's when Menendez stood up to challenge the President, telling Obama he took "personal offense" to his assertions, the New York Times reported, arguing that he has worked to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions for many years and was not motivated by political considerations.

"It was not confrontational. It was just a good lively exchange," Sen. Tom Udall, D-New Mexico said. "We know there are some differences there. But they showed tremendous respect for each other."

"I wouldn't say he confronted the President," said Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont who caucuses with the Democrats. "He has a different point of view than the President and Bob is a very smart guy. I don't agree with him but he is entitled to his opinion."

The senior administration official also described the exchange as respectful.

Obama said that he would support new sanctions if negotiations fail, but doing so while negotiations are ongoing would not only threaten the talks, but could shift the blame onto the U.S., and not Iran, if negotiations fail, the official said.

Obama asserted during a press conference Friday that he would veto a new sanctions bill, urging Congress to "hold your fire."

"I will veto a bill that comes to my desk and I will make the argument to the American people as to why I'm doing so," Obama said. "I respectfully ask them to hold off a few months to see if we have the possibility of solving a big problem without resorting possibly to war."

Menendez would not comment on his exchange with the President because he doesn't "violate my private conversations."

"Having said that, on the issue, I have respect for the President but no one has followed this issue more in Congress that I have," Menendez said at an event in New Jersey on Friday afternoon.

Menendez went on to express his frustration with a negotiation process that has been ongoing since late 2013, and again pushed for his bill, the latest version of which would not impose sanctions on Iran until July.

"I do not believe in negotiating out of weakness, I believe in negotiating out of strength. I think weakness invites provocation, I think strength avoids it. So it is counterintuitive to understand that somehow Iran will walk away because of some sanctions that would never take place if they strike a deal and or which the President has waiver authority," Menendez said.

New Congress, new nuclear showdown over Iran

A sanctions bill sponsored by Menendez and Republican Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois (known as Kirk-Menendez) failed to muster the 60 votes necessary to clear a filibuster last year after Obama threated to veto the legislation.

A new 54-member majority in the Senate has given Republicans and the dozen Democrats who staunchly support additional sanctions new drive to pass legislation this year -- just as talks between the U.S., other world powers and Iran resumed this week.

Menendez and his Republican colleague should be able to easily rally the votes to clear a filibuster, but reaching the 67-vote threshold to override a presidential veto is another matter. Several Democratic supporter's of last year's bill were ousted in the midterms, and four others backtracked their support after the bill failed.

That is pushing Kirk and Menendez to rework the bill as they look to attract broader support, though Kirk told CNN last week that he is pushing to keep the bill largely intact.

Last year's bill would have imposed stricter conditions on Iran to avoid additional sanctions, likely imposing sanctions before negotiations came to a term and prompting Iranian assertions that the bill's passage would prompt them to ditch the negotiating table.

The Senate Banking Committee is holding a hearing Tuesday to discuss additional sanctions against Iran on Tuesday.

Asked if the President's comments persuaded Menendez to drop new legislation, Udall was doubtful.

"We've had this discussion for months and months," Udall said. "Since we've had so many discussions about it I'm not sure any one ten minute discussion about it is going to turn us one way or another."

CNN's Jim Acosta contributed to this report.
Joined: 7/26/2014
Msg: 1739
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 4:44:51 PM

CNN's Jim Acosta contributed to this report.

In realted news, forget about the cost of gas and look over here as the sky is falling and we need to shoot some sh*t up.
Joined: 10/24/2014
Msg: 1740
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 4:49:04 PM
AJ, ^^^^

it's nice to know someone in his party has the balls to stand up to this character.
Joined: 2/27/2010
Msg: 1741
view profile
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 4:50:02 PM
More sanctions during negotiation is just asking for world opinion to come down hard on the u.s.

Giving time that you promised during negotiation will show you are holding your side of the bargain.

What's the hurry for more sanctions that hurt Iranians?

Obama is smart not to press, not weak.

Maybe he is finally seeing that might isn't right to the rest of the world.

Nuclear armed countries should clean up their own yards before telling others what to do. Fixing the leaking power plants and talking with russia and israel about getting rid of all the nukes would be a good start.

Maybe Obama sees that u.s. hypocritical policy is more of a threat than rumors of iran trying to build up nukes?

Ukraine gave up their weapons, look what happened to them. If supporting a coup is how we thank them , no wondrr iran is slow to move.

Also wtf is Nat being invided to state his case? Obama asked others to butt out while he negotiated. Even russia thinks talk will work.

Do the neo cons kow tow to israel so much that they are willing to start another war?

Does the u.s. take orders from a war criminal who's too afraid to face a courtroom? It sure seems that the neo cons want to.
Joined: 11/28/2014
Msg: 1742
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 4:52:52 PM
Sorry HFX that you hate to hear what I posted, you should take that up with who the story is about. Not needing to "shoot some sh*t up" but you sure hate to read it. Hmmmmm, wonder why????

Is "realted" a word? Just checking to see if I can hear a new word for the day, it's a good thing to hear words never heard of before.
Joined: 7/26/2014
Msg: 1743
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 5:18:34 PM

Sorry HFX that you hate to hear what I posted,

How do you know if I hate it or not?

you should take that up with who the story is about.

"with who"?

Not needing to "shoot some sh*t up" but you sure hate to read it. Hmmmmm, wonder why????

You are claiming to be able ot read my mind, are you really some type of Witch?

Is "realted" a word? Just checking to see if I can hear a new word for the day, it's a good thing to hear words never heard of before.

Your computer talks to you?

Or is this more of your wizards witchcraft voodoo stuff?
Joined: 10/24/2014
Msg: 1744
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 6:03:02 PM
Dame White said:

Giving time that you promised during negotiation will show you are holding your side of the bargain.

What's the hurry for more sanctions that hurt Iranians?

Obama is smart not to press, not weak.

would you be surprised the Fox News Commentator Bill O'Reilly said the exact same thing and agreed with you on yesterday's O'Reilly Factor?
Joined: 10/17/2005
Msg: 1745
view profile
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 6:35:12 PM
<Message 1865 ... the challenge to provide a link was not yours, but you jumped in to save his drunken rambling hide. You thought you had an article that would cover your azz as well as his azz but this time you're gonna have to talk to the previous administration about releasing almost all the prisoners who went back to the fight ... if they really did that.

You posted a link that may have provided a list of releases. Did you bother to check who released them?

Wee Willy wrote ...
... but failed to mention how many Islamic terrorists he has freed since we had them imprisoned.

Then I posted ...
If you had been paying attention you would have seen that the only prisoners that were released were not considered a threat to anyone.
That was a reference to the most recent releases ... not all of them ... but nonetheless released by President Obama.

Wee Willy wrote ...
... they have gone back to do battle and kill Americans.

Then I posted ...
Wrong again ... but if you think you're right, why not find a link that proves what you are writing and post it.
Which "Wee Willy" has failed to do.

Wee Willy also wrote ...
he is aiding and abetting the enemy!!!

So now why don't we look and see who was really "aiding and abetting the enemy ...
Fact Check: Spinning How Many Gitmo Detainees Have 'Returned to the Fight'

November 24, 2013 1:00 am • Glenn Kessler Washington Post

“The recidivism rate is nearly 29 percent and has been climbing steadily since detainees began being released from Guantanamo. This includes nearly 10 percent of detainees who have returned to the fight after being transferred by the current administration following the administration’s extensive review of each detainee.”

– Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.), statement on the Senate floor, Nov. 19, statement on the Senate floor, Nov. 19

During a debate in the Senate over whether to loosen restrictions on transferring detainees out of Guantanamo Bay, Sen. Chambliss made two statements about the rate of recidivism (return to terrorist activity) that are worth exploring.

The dispute over these numbers has been long and complex, and we won’t review that history, but readers might benefit from learning what “returned to the fight” means. For the purpose of examining the numbers, we will assume that each detainee had a solid reason for being there, though of course that is also hotly debated.

The Facts
Since 2012, the Director of National Intelligence has released a semi-annual report on the rate of recidivism. The report has a total number and then also divides it between the George W. Bush and Obama administrations.

The numbers have two categories: “confirmed of reengaging” and “suspected of reengaging.”

Confirmed is self-explanatory. Here’s how the report defines suspected: “Plausible but unverified or single-source reporting indicating a specific former GTMO detainee is directly involved in terrorist or insurgent activities. For the purposes of this definition, engagement in anti-US statements or propaganda does not qualify as terrorist or insurgent activity.”

The report shows that 16.6 percent of the 603 detainees transferred are listed as confirmed and 12.3 percent are suspected. Add that together, and you get 28.9 percent. That’s Chambliss’ “nearly 29 percent.”

I think you can follow that so far. Now here comes the part neither you or "Wee Willy" will want to know ...
But nearly all of the detainees confirmed or suspected of militant activities were released during the Bush years. The numbers have plunged since Obama took office five years ago, as Chambliss indicates by saying that “nearly 10 percent of detainees who have returned to the fight.” Of the detainees released by Obama, 4.2 percent are confirmed and 5.6 percent are suspected.

Put another way, only 3 percent of all detainees confirmed of returning to terrorism were released by Obama — and just 5 percent of those in the “suspected” category.
Got that? NEARLY ALL were released DURING THE BUSH YEARS.

So why does Chambliss say the rate has been climbing steadily? An aide pointed to the fact that the overall rate has increased since these reports have been released regularly starting in 2012.

Actually, the major reason for the change in the numbers is that five more detainees released by Bush have been confirmed as returning to terrorism. There have also been two detainees released by Obama added to the suspected list, but no more additional detainees have been confirmed.
Sooo G"W" (and his cronies) are the ones who have been releasing the most detainees who are returning to terrorism.

“It generally takes some time before it can be determined whether detainees have reengaged, so it is expected that the number of recidivists among the detainees who were released post-2009 will only continue to rise as it has done in the past,” the aide said.

The aide also defended Chambliss’ use of the term “returned to the fight” to refer to detainees who are simply suspected of returning to terrorism.

“This does not automatically mean that he is a fighter — an individual can be directly involved in terrorist activities in a number of ways, from being a financier, a provider of materials to make bombs, a suicide bomber — the options are almost endless, but at the end of the day, it means that he is not just a bystander to terrorist activity,” the aide said. “A detainee is not a recidivist, even a suspected one, if he is indirectly involved or thinking about being involved. The only variable between suspected and confirmed is the level of information that the intelligence community has to prove that this is the case.”

The aide pointed to a statement that Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. made before Congress in 2011, responding to a question from Chambliss:

“You’re quite right about the recidivism rate. It’s on the order of 27 percent. There have been 599 detainees that have been repatriated from Guantanamo; some 161 of them either confirmed or suspected to be recidivists.”

But note that Clapper was careful to say “confirmed or suspected.” At another congressional hearing in 2011, the director of defense intelligence at the time, Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess Jr., pushed back against Chambliss when the senator used the “returned to the fight” language:

“In regards to the first part of your question, the 25 percent figure that you mention is a combination of both confirmed and suspected. So the whole 25 percent would not be confirmed by the Defense Intelligence Agency in terms of having returned to the fight or reengaged.”

A Pentagon spokesman has also said: “Someone on the ‘suspected’ list could very possibly not be engaged in activities that are counter to our national security interests.”

It’s worth noting that the administration has not been especially transparent — for perhaps understandable reasons — about how it has made these “confirmed” or “suspected” determinations. Earlier this year, the New America Foundation came up with a much smaller figure — 8.8 percent — when researchers tried to identify detainees confirmed to be or suspected of engaging in militant activities.

Pinocchio Test

There are many ways to look at this data. Clearly, some officials, such as Clapper, and some news organizations have combined the numbers as Chambliss did.

But Chambliss’ remarks veered into being misleading when he failed to specify that this figure contained both people confirmed and suspected of returning to terrorism. Instead, he used a pejorative umbrella term — “returned to the fight” — that the officials compiling this data say is not correct.

Now comes a part that neither you or "Wee Willy" will want to read, so close your eyes and hold your breath ... here it comes ...
Moreover, by saying the number is steadily climbing, Chambliss appears to be punishing this administration for the mistakes of the previous one. No matter how you slice it, the rate has dropped under the Obama administration, which even Chambliss appears to acknowledge by citing the 10 percent figure.

Two Pinnocchios.

You all like to pretend that Islamic Terrorist acts are only a small percentage of terrorist acts perpetrated around the world....if you look at data for 2014 Muslims attacks make up a majority of all Terrorist attacks.
I don't think anyone is denying that radical/extremists who claim to be Muslim have been committing terrorist acts, but that does not justify treating or viewing all Muslims as jihadists.

Do you treat or view all Catholics as child molesters just because of the deviate and perverted acts of a few priests?
Message 1875 ...
... not condemning a whole religion just those in the religion who use their religion as a justification for perpetrating terrorist acts...

What about "X-tian" terrorism? How many people have died at the hands of the "X-tians"? Let's see what the "X-tians" have been up to ...
Christian terrorism
Christian terrorism comprises terrorist acts by groups or individuals who cite motivations or goals that they interpret to be Christian, or within a more basic context of sectarian violence and/or prejudices such as intolerance. As with other forms of religious terrorism, they have cited interpretations of the tenets of faith – in this case interpretations of the Old Testament, as their inspiration to justify violence and killing.

Christian Identity is a loosely affiliated global group of churches and individuals devoted to a radicalized theology which asserts that North European whites are the direct descendants of the lost tribes of Israel, God's chosen people. It has been associated with groups such as the Aryan Nations, Aryan Republican Army, Army of God, Phineas Priesthood, and The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord. It has been cited as an influence on a number of terrorist attacks around the world, including the 2002 Soweto bombings. Following the killings in Norway by Anders Breivik in 2011, analyst Daryl Johnson of the United States Department of Homeland Security said that the Hutaree Christian militia movement possessed more weapons than the combined weapons holdings of all Islamic terror defendants charged in the US since the September 11 attacks.

How do you feel about that? Is that as interesting as what you label "Islamic terrorism"? NO? Why not?

There's a whole lot more in that article ... apparently "X-tians" aren't just picking on the Muslims, they make a habit of picking on a lot of others as well. The Muslims are just their current target.

(Excerpts)Gunpowder Plot
According to Vahabph D. Aghai, "The beginnings of modern terrorism can be traced back to England and the Gunpowder Plot of 1605." Sue Mahan and Pamala L. Griset classify the plot as religious terrorism, writing that "Fawkes and his colleagues justified their actions in terms of religion." Peter Steinfels also characterizes this plot as a notable case of religious terrorism.

Pogroms (See also: Religious persecution and Ethnic cleansing)
Orthodox Christian movements in Romania, such as the Iron Guard and Lancieri, which have been characterized by Yad Vashem and Stanley G. Payne as anti-semitic and fascist, respectively, were responsible for involvement in the Bucharest pogrom, and political murders during the 1930s.
Ku Klux Klan
After the American Civil War of 1861–1865, members of the Protestant-led Ku Klux Klan (KKK) organization began engaging in arson, beatings, destruction of property, lynching, murder, rape, tar-and-feathering, whipping and intimidation via such means as cross burning. They targeted African Americans, Jews, Catholics, and other social or ethnic minorities.

Klan members had an explicitly Christian terrorist ideology, basing their beliefs in part on a "religious foundation" in Christianity. The goals of the KKK included, from an early time onward, an intent to "reestablish Protestant Christian values in America by any means possible", and they believed that "Jesus was the first Klansman." From 1915 onward, Klansmen conducted cross-burnings not only to intimidate targets, but also to demonstrate their respect and reverence for Jesus Christ, and the ritual of lighting crosses was steeped in Christian symbolism, including saying prayers and singing Christian hymns. Within Christianity the Klan directed hostilities against Catholics. Modern Klan organizations, such as the Knights Party, USA, continue to focus on the Christian supremacist message, detecting a "war" which allegedly aims to destroy "western Christian civilization."

According to terrorism expert David C. Rapoport, a "religious wave", or cycle, of terrorism dates from approximately 1979 to the present.

Anti-Hindu violence in India
Christian violence arose in various contiguous states in North-East India. In 2000, John Joseph, a member of India's National Minority Commission, described Christian militancy as rampant in the northeastern states.

Tripura (Further information: Tripura rebellion)
The National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT), is a rebel group that seeks the secession of Tripura, North-East India, and is a proscribed terrorist organization in India. Group activities have been described as Christian terrorists engaging in terrorist violence motivated by their Christian beliefs. The NLFT includes in its aims the forced conversion of all tribespeople in Tripura to Christianity. The NLFT says that it is fighting not only for the removal of Bengali immigrants from the tribal areas, "but also for the tribal areas of the state to become overtly Christian", and "has warned members of the tribal community that they may be attacked if they do not accept its Christian agenda". The NLFT is listed as a terrorist organization in the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002. The state government contends that the Baptist Church of Tripura supplies arms and gives financial support to the NLFT. Reports from the state government and Indian media describe activities such as the acquisition by the NLFT of explosives through the Noapara Baptist Church in Tripura, and threats of killing Hindus celebrating religious festivals. Over 20 Hindus in Tripura were reported to have been killed by the NLFT from 1999 to 2001 for resisting forced conversion to Christianity. According to Hindus in the area, there have also been forced conversions of tribal villagers to Christianity by armed NLFT militants. These forcible conversions, sometimes including the use of "rape as a means of intimidation", have also been noted by academics outside of India. In 2000, the NLFT broke into a temple and gunned down a popular Hindu preacher popularly known as Shanti Kali.

The National Socialist Council of Nagaland, Issac-Muivah faction (slogan: "Nagaland for Christ"), is accused of carrying out the 1992–1993 ethnic cleansing of Kuki tribes in Manipur, said to have leave over 900 people dead. During that NSCN-IM operation, 350 Kuki villages were driven out and about 100,000 Kukis were turned into refugees.

Sabra and Shatila massacre
Maronite Christian militias perpetrated the Karantina and Tel al-Zaatar massacres of Palestinians and Lebanese Muslims during Lebanon's 1975–1990 civil war. The 1982 Sabra and Shatila massacre, which targeted unarmed Palestinian refugees for rape and murder, was considered to be genocide by the United Nations General Assembly. A British photographer present during the incident said that "People who committed the acts of murder that I saw that day were wearing [crucifixes] and were calling themselves Christians." After the end of the civil war, Christian militias refused to disband, concentrating in the Israeli-occupied south of the country, where they terrorized Muslim and Druze villages and forcefully recruited men and boys from those communities into their groups.

Utøya Island killings (Main article: 2011 Norway attacks)
In July 2011, Anders Behring Breivik was arrested and charged with terrorism after a car bombing in Oslo and a mass shooting on Utøya island that killed 77 people. Hours prior to the events, Breivik released a 1,500-page manifesto detailing his beliefs that immigrants were undermining Norway's traditional Christian values, and identifying himself as a "Christian crusader" while describing himself as not very religious.[73][74][75] Although initial news reports described him as a Christian fundamentalist, subsequent analyses of his motivations have noted that he did not only display Christian terrorist inclinations, but also had non-religious, right-wing beliefs. Mark Juergensmeyer and John Mark Reynolds have stated that the events were Christian terrorism, whereas Brad Hirschfield has rejected the Christian terrorist label.

Lord's Resistance Army
The Lord's Resistance Army, a cult and guerrilla army, was engaged in an armed rebellion against the Ugandan government in 2005. It has been accused of using child soldiers and of committing numerous crimes against humanity; including massacres, abductions, mutilation, torture, rape, and using forced child labourers as soldiers, porters, and sex slaves. A quasi-religious movement that mixes some aspects of Christian beliefs with its own brand of spiritualism, it is led by Joseph Kony, who proclaims himself the spokesperson of God and a spirit medium, primarily of the "Holy Spirit" which the Acholi believe can represent itself in many manifestations. LRA fighters wear rosary beads and recite passages from the Bible before battle.

Well, well, well ... isn't "Christian terrorism" just lovely?

I think you so-called "X-tians" who are so hell-bent on naming terrorism "Islamic terrorism" need to clean house before you go out and yell about others. I note that a lot of the "X-tian" terrorism has been recently (2005, 2011, etc.) and I didn't even include what the Spaniards did to the Aztecs or what happened to the Hawaiians(!) OR what "X-tians" did to our Native Americans.

But you "X-tians" ... just keep screaming about stuff ... because all you have to do is go to church and ask for forgiveness and all is better ... right?
Joined: 10/24/2014
Msg: 1746
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 7:01:36 PM
HERE'S WEE WILLY'S ANSWER (I prefer to be called Schmoopy)

A report released by the House Armed Services subcommittee in 2012 revealed that 27% of Gitmo detainees return to a life of terror after their release.

Previously On Released Gitmo Detainees:
** Gitmo Detainees Re-Arrested in Russia
** Former Gitmo Prisoner Arrested for Terrorism in Moscow
** Three Former Gitmo Detainees Held in Morocco
** Former Gitmo Inmate Involved in Russian Terror Attack on Nalchik
** Former Gitmo Detainee Re-Arrested in Pakistan
** Seven Percent of Gitmo Detainees Return to Battlefield.
** Former Club Gitmo Detainee Carries Out Suicide Mission in Iraq
** Pentagon: 61 Gitmo Grads Returned to Terror
** Former “Rehabilitated” Gitmo Detainee Becomes Al-Qaeda Chief
** 2 Former “Rehabilitated” Gitmo Grads Appear in Al-Qaeda Movie
** 11 Former “Rehabilitated” Gitmo Grads Back On Saudi Most Wanted List
** American Teenager Murdered By Former Gitmo Detainee
** Breaking: Taliban’s Top Officer in Southern Afghanistan Is Former Gitmo Detainee
** Former Gitmo Detainee Leads Fight Against US Troops
** Another Former “Rehabilitated” Gitmo Detainee Killed in Shootout
** Former Gitmo Detainee Now Al Qaeda “Spiritual Leader”
** Former Gitmo Detainees Lead Yemeni Al-Qaeda Group Linked to Detroit Bomber
** Former Gitmo Detainee Leads Insurgency in Southern Afghanistan
** Thanks Barack… Another Gitmo Detainee Returns to the Fold
** 25 Former Gitmo Detainees From Saudi Arabia Return to Life of Terror

THAT'S 27% return to kill.
Joined: 4/29/2009
Msg: 1747
view profile
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/21/2015 7:55:11 PM

A report released by the House Armed Services subcommittee in 2012 revealed that 27% of Gitmo detainees return to a life of terror after their release.

THAT'S 27% return to kill.

Given that a) you spend $60 billion per year on your prison system - that within 3 years of their relase, 67% are rearrested and 52% are re incarcerated - I'd say they've got a pretty good record.
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 1748
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/22/2015 3:12:52 AM

A report released by the House Armed Services subcommittee in 2012 revealed that 27% of Gitmo detainees return to a life of terror after their release.

Nice of you to bring that up since it was former President Bush who transferred or released 520 of the detainees compared to 88 by President Obama.

And of the 88 transferred or released by President Obama 1 has returned to terror and that detainee, Abdul Hafiz, has been killed in a drone strike.
Joined: 8/17/2014
Msg: 1749
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/22/2015 3:56:14 AM
America needs more drones.

The other 87 are on the down low.
Joined: 8/20/2014
Msg: 1750
Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch
Posted: 1/22/2015 4:13:11 AM

Nice of you to bring that up since it was former President Bush who transferred or released 520 of the detainees compared to 88 by President Obama.
even if that is true, so what? the point is that releasing terrorists is not a good idea even your side admits that 1/4 them return to Terrorism..thought it was stupid when Bush did it and even more stupid of Obama to do it if what you said about the terrorist Bush released is true,,you would think a super genius like Obama would be able to figure that out.
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > Election 2014: Karma is a b!tch