Comments on: “What Goes Around, Comes Around …” & “The End Justifies the Means …” http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/ Sun, 27 May 2012 07:03:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: ugo http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206820 ugo Wed, 20 May 2009 05:55:43 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206820 Well, for those who voted for the current President Obama. Thanks for giving us The Mr. President Obama. I hope he stops messing things up. The rest of us will waite for the next election. Well, for those who voted for the current President Obama. Thanks for giving us The Mr. President Obama. I hope he stops messing things up. The rest of us will waite for the next election.

]]> By: FranSC http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206815 FranSC Wed, 20 May 2009 05:41:47 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206815 Oh, please, James Guglielmino!! YOU absolutely do NOT know what you are talking about! Yes, there has always been some corruption in politics, but what happened with the caucuses, the fundraising, voter fraud, the race baiting and I could go on, was of epic proportions. We have detailed this stuff thousands of times on here. Gaffs in Hillary's campaign? B0's "masterful" campaign? Which campaign are you speaking of - the fundraising campaign run by a company in Pelosi's district that she got to do it for the 0 campaign that raised 76% of all contributions over $1,000, the MoveOn.org campaign run by George Soros, the ACORN campaign well funded by the US Congress whose republicans didn't even realize it only supported democrats, the media campaign happily run by media owners, or the front campaign run by the Chicago stooges that took credit for all the campaigns. You notice B0 called David Plough the best campaign manager in history. Where is David Plough? He isn't working in the B0 WH. Oh, please, James Guglielmino!! YOU absolutely do NOT know what you are talking about! Yes, there has always been some corruption in politics, but what happened with the caucuses, the fundraising, voter fraud, the race baiting and I could go on, was of epic proportions. We have detailed this stuff thousands of times on here. Gaffs in Hillary’s campaign? B0′s “masterful” campaign? Which campaign are you speaking of – the fundraising campaign run by a company in Pelosi’s district that she got to do it for the 0 campaign that raised 76% of all contributions over $1,000, the MoveOn.org campaign run by George Soros, the ACORN campaign well funded by the US Congress whose republicans didn’t even realize it only supported democrats, the media campaign happily run by media owners, or the front campaign run by the Chicago stooges that took credit for all the campaigns. You notice B0 called David Plough the best campaign manager in history. Where is David Plough? He isn’t working in the B0 WH.

]]> By: FranSC http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206797 FranSC Wed, 20 May 2009 04:47:49 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206797 <blockquote>...the DNC refuses to inform voters who ask, on what basis they determined BO possessed such eligibility....</blockquote> Nancy Pelosi is the one who "certified" the election results and answered THE question that asks if the president-elect is a naturalized American citizen. She simply and quickly answered, "yes" and signed the certification. I'm sorry I cannot reference that, but I'm pretty sure it was someone here at NQ that knew how it came about. I remember commenting that it was the missing link for me since I had assumed B0 had lied (probably) when he answered the question. jbjd, I realize this does not answer the burning question of what satisfied the DNC that he was born in this country as he claims to be in the face of lots of evidence to the contrary. I don't think the DNC cared whether the naturalized citizenship was real or not. They were so determined to make him POTUS it was too late for those kinds of details. We even heard this week at Nancy's news conference how focused on electing a dem president she was in 2002 & 2003. So when Kerry didn't make it in 2004, that focus became obsession for 2008 - B0 was selected by them by 2006 at the latest if not following his Dem Nat'l Conv speech in 2004.

…the DNC refuses to inform voters who ask, on what basis they determined BO possessed such eligibility….

Nancy Pelosi is the one who “certified” the election results and answered THE question that asks if the president-elect is a naturalized American citizen. She simply and quickly answered, “yes” and signed the certification. I’m sorry I cannot reference that, but I’m pretty sure it was someone here at NQ that knew how it came about. I remember commenting that it was the missing link for me since I had assumed B0 had lied (probably) when he answered the question.

jbjd, I realize this does not answer the burning question of what satisfied the DNC that he was born in this country as he claims to be in the face of lots of evidence to the contrary. I don’t think the DNC cared whether the naturalized citizenship was real or not. They were so determined to make him POTUS it was too late for those kinds of details. We even heard this week at Nancy’s news conference how focused on electing a dem president she was in 2002 & 2003. So when Kerry didn’t make it in 2004, that focus became obsession for 2008 – B0 was selected by them by 2006 at the latest if not following his Dem Nat’l Conv speech in 2004.

]]> By: James Guglielmino http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206753 James Guglielmino Wed, 20 May 2009 02:44:02 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206753 I said this in a comment to another post but it seems appropriate to repeat it as a comment to your post: "......What you refuse to accept is that the government has the right to set parameters for money that it is granting. The idea that this, in any way violates the Constitution or rule of law, is so preposterous as to call into question the sentience of anyone making such a claim. As a friend said, " 'they have no idea what they’re talking about. There are no Constitutional questions here. The federal government is entirely within its rights to set requirements for states to receive funds." "Democrats in congress realized early on that Republican governors were likely to use stimulus funds for purposes that wouldn’t help the economy. So they put requirements in the law to prevent misuse of the funds. If anyone thinks there’s a legal problem with that, they are welcome to take it to court…' I said this in a comment to another post but it seems appropriate to repeat it as a comment to your post: “……What you refuse to accept is that the government has the right to set parameters for money that it is granting. The idea that this, in any way violates the Constitution or rule of law, is so preposterous as to call into question the sentience of anyone making such a claim. As a friend said, ”
‘they have no idea what they’re talking about. There are no Constitutional questions here. The federal government is entirely within its rights to set requirements for states to receive funds.”

“Democrats in congress realized early on that Republican governors were likely to use stimulus funds for purposes that wouldn’t help the economy. So they put requirements in the law to prevent misuse of the funds. If anyone thinks there’s a legal problem with that, they are welcome to take it to court…’

]]> By: James Guglielmino http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206752 James Guglielmino Wed, 20 May 2009 02:41:08 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206752 Fine. Now see if he can explain the now FOUR reported "mistakes"/mistakes made by the CIA, including at least two that CIA apparently admits making....with no explanation on how the "mistakes"/mistakes could have occurred. Bob Grahm kept track in his little anal retentive journal and looke up the dates...gos, gee, golly, CIA "erred," and now Congressman David Obey (D-WI) has become the latest lawmaker to highlight erroneous information in CIA records. Fine. Now see if he can explain the now FOUR reported “mistakes”/mistakes made by the CIA, including at least two that CIA apparently admits making….with no explanation on how the “mistakes”/mistakes could have occurred. Bob Grahm kept track in his little anal retentive journal and looke up the dates…gos, gee, golly, CIA “erred,” and now Congressman David Obey (D-WI) has become the latest lawmaker to highlight erroneous information in CIA records.

]]> By: James Guglielmino http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206749 James Guglielmino Wed, 20 May 2009 02:35:25 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206749 Do you consider Faux to be part of MSM. What a strange assertion. Where did you get it? Pelosi is all over the place and almost everyone is critical even though it SHOULD be a non-story. The story is that we tortured and in case you haven't noticed, the torturers, those who support torturing and defend it as a useful tool are coming out of the wood work, too. If you don't believe in torture, you may want to forget Pelosi. If she did know and didn't do anything, she is STILL way down on the totum pole of those who really, REALLY, *REALLY need to be prosecuted. And don't misunderstand that I would try to protect her if an investigation done by a special prosecutor revealed that she cowardly failed to protect the rule of law. Oh,for a fun video, find Jesse Ventura going after a torturer on Faux. Let me see if I can get it for you. Yup: http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/19/ventura-schools-kilmeade/ Gug Do you consider Faux to be part of MSM. What a strange assertion. Where did you get it? Pelosi is all over the place and almost everyone is critical even though it SHOULD be a non-story. The story is that we tortured and in case you haven’t noticed, the torturers, those who support torturing and defend it as a useful tool are coming out of the wood work, too. If you don’t believe in torture, you may want to forget Pelosi. If she did know and didn’t do anything, she is STILL way down on the totum pole of those who really, REALLY, *REALLY need to be prosecuted. And don’t misunderstand that I would try to protect her if an investigation done by a special prosecutor revealed that she cowardly failed to protect the rule of law. Oh,for a fun video, find Jesse Ventura going after a torturer on Faux. Let me see if I can get it for you. Yup: http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/19/ventura-schools-kilmeade/
Gug

]]> By: James Guglielmino http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206745 James Guglielmino Wed, 20 May 2009 02:29:18 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206745 It AMAZES me that the term "social justice" has been turned by some into a blasphemy. It isn't and it is not in opposition to rule of law. What you refuse to accept is that the government has the right to set parameters for money that it is granting. The idea that this, in any way violates the Constitution or rule of law, is so preposterous as to call into question the sentience of anyone making such a claim. As a friend said, " "they have no idea what they’re talking about. There are no Constitutional questions here. The federal government is entirely within its rights to set requirements for states to receive funds." "Democrats in congress realized early on that Republican governors were likely to use stimulus funds for purposes that wouldn’t help the economy. So they put requirements in the law to prevent misuse of the funds. If anyone thinks there’s a legal problem with that, they are welcome to take it to court…" It AMAZES me that the term “social justice” has been turned by some into a blasphemy. It isn’t and it is not in opposition to rule of law. What you refuse to accept is that the government has the right to set parameters for money that it is granting. The idea that this, in any way violates the Constitution or rule of law, is so preposterous as to call into question the sentience of anyone making such a claim. As a friend said, ”
“they have no idea what they’re talking about. There are no Constitutional questions here. The federal government is entirely within its rights to set requirements for states to receive funds.”

“Democrats in congress realized early on that Republican governors were likely to use stimulus funds for purposes that wouldn’t help the economy. So they put requirements in the law to prevent misuse of the funds. If anyone thinks there’s a legal problem with that, they are welcome to take it to court…”

]]> By: James Guglielmino http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206741 James Guglielmino Wed, 20 May 2009 02:19:13 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206741 Let me say it again. The parties nominate in whatever way they want to nominate. Is it a fair and democratic process? Heck, no. There isn't much fair and democratic about any voting in this country. Think Ohio in 2006. Think Florida in 2000,where the Republicans essentiall promoted a riot of white shirts to stop the recounts. Obama is our President. If you hate him as much as I grew to hate shrub Bush, go ahead and keep ranting and raving but if you believe that we are vastly better off than we have been in the last 8 years, criticize his policies in a way that puts pressure on him to be better and stop complaining that Hillary should have been something or other. As I pointed out in a previous comment, there were numerous gaffs in her campaign that made a lot of people not trust her. Obama didn't make those kinds of mistakes. By all accounts that I am aware of, his was a VERY well run campaign for the nomination and a masterful campaign for the presidency. Gug Let me say it again. The parties nominate in whatever way they want to nominate. Is it a fair and democratic process? Heck, no. There isn’t much fair and democratic about any voting in this country. Think Ohio in 2006. Think Florida in 2000,where the Republicans essentiall promoted a riot of white shirts to stop the recounts. Obama is our President. If you hate him as much as I grew to hate shrub Bush, go ahead and keep ranting and raving but if you believe that we are vastly better off than we have been in the last 8 years, criticize his policies in a way that puts pressure on him to be better and stop complaining that Hillary should have been something or other. As I pointed out in a previous comment, there were numerous gaffs in her campaign that made a lot of people not trust her. Obama didn’t make those kinds of mistakes. By all accounts that I am aware of, his was a VERY well run campaign for the nomination and a masterful campaign for the presidency.
Gug

]]> By: mary http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206419 mary Tue, 19 May 2009 00:34:29 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206419 jbjd Agreed. Not funny and out-of-bounds in an anti-misogynist site....thanks jbjd

Agreed. Not funny and out-of-bounds in an anti-misogynist site….thanks

]]> By: James Guglielmino http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206354 James Guglielmino Mon, 18 May 2009 20:27:52 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206354 What are the *facts* as you understand them, FranSC? Isn't it a fact that the administration has threatened to with hold the federal funds from California? "The Obama administration is threatening to rescind billions of dollars in federal stimulus money if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state lawmakers do not restore wage cuts to unionized home healthcare workers approved in February as part of the budget." I imagine that you don't disagree with that report, right? But, isn't *this* also true? " Schwarzenegger's office was advised this week by federal health officials that the wage reduction, which will save California $74 million, violates provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Failure to revoke the scheduled wage cut before it takes effect July 1 could cost California $6.8 billion in stimulus money, according to state officials. " All I am saying is that the President is required by the Constitution to enforce the law. If this law says that wages cannot be frozen or reduced, then the President seems to be required to with hold the funds if the state insists on freezing or reducing the wages. AND, all the assertions here that he is doing what he is doing because he is paying back the unions are just specious arguments. He seems to not have any choice. I would be happy to have you show me the fallacy of what I have posted. What are the *facts* as you understand them, FranSC? Isn’t it a fact that the administration has threatened to with hold the federal funds from California?
“The Obama administration is threatening to rescind billions of dollars in federal stimulus money if Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state lawmakers do not restore wage cuts to unionized home healthcare workers approved in February as part of the budget.” I imagine that you don’t disagree with that report, right?
But, isn’t *this* also true? ” Schwarzenegger’s office was advised this week by federal health officials that the wage reduction, which will save California $74 million, violates provisions of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Failure to revoke the scheduled wage cut before it takes effect July 1 could cost California $6.8 billion in stimulus money, according to state officials. ”
All I am saying is that the President is required by the Constitution to enforce the law. If this law says that wages cannot be frozen or reduced, then the President seems to be required to with hold the funds if the state insists on freezing or reducing the wages. AND, all the assertions here that he is doing what he is doing because he is paying back the unions are just specious arguments. He seems to not have any choice. I would be happy to have you show me the fallacy of what I have posted.

]]> By: James Guglielmino http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206353 James Guglielmino Mon, 18 May 2009 20:24:31 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206353 Should I ignore your childish play with my nick name, which comes from the first three letters of my last name, Guglielmino, or respond in kind? Nahhhh, I'm old enough to be your daddy so I'll try to set an example for you. Was Ms Pelosi "falsely" called out? Well, there certainly is evidence for that. I have repeatedly asked for one of you to explain how Senator Graham, who is anal retentive about keeping notes, could have found that the CIA was so wrong in its assertion that he had EVER been briefed about torture. If it was wrong about Graham, why couldn't it be wrong about Pelosi? Wing on over to "Empty Wheel" http://tinyurl.com/r565xt to see more damning stuff from Graham. "But Graham's other point was clearly damning. He said the briefing occurred in the Hart Senate Office Building and not--as happened with highly classified briefings--at the White House. That detail, plus Graham's earlier observation that staffers attended the briefing, suggest the briefing was not treated as typical "Gang of Four" or "Gang of Eight" briefings were generally treated. " Also go to Empty Wheel" again http://tinyurl.com/qo3fem for a parsing of what Panetta actually said but potentially more important for some information on the guy who probably headed the briefing was Jose Rogriguez, the man who admits to having destroyed the tapes of the torturing. So, yeah, I'd say that there is considerable question as to whether Pelosi is getting a fair shake. Frankly, we don't know what has happened and "ya'll" are just way to happy to nail her to a cross. Why? I don't much care for Pelosi, either but are you being fair? I don't think so. AND, a far more important issue is that torture was DONE. Frankly, I don't care if the person is a Democrat or a Republican. I want those responsible for torture or for knowing but not trying to stop it, brought to justice. It is my very strong sense that is the position that any true American should and would take. Should I ignore your childish play with my nick name, which comes from the first three letters of my last name, Guglielmino, or respond in kind? Nahhhh, I’m old enough to be your daddy so I’ll try to set an example for you.
Was Ms Pelosi “falsely” called out? Well, there certainly is evidence for that. I have repeatedly asked for one of you to explain how Senator Graham, who is anal retentive about keeping notes, could have found that the CIA was so wrong in its assertion that he had EVER been briefed about torture. If it was wrong about Graham, why couldn’t it be wrong about Pelosi?
Wing on over to “Empty Wheel” http://tinyurl.com/r565xt to see more damning stuff from Graham.
“But Graham’s other point was clearly damning. He said the briefing occurred in the Hart Senate Office Building and not–as happened with highly classified briefings–at the White House. That detail, plus Graham’s earlier observation that staffers attended the briefing, suggest the briefing was not treated as typical “Gang of Four” or “Gang of Eight” briefings were generally treated. ”

Also go to Empty Wheel” again http://tinyurl.com/qo3fem for a parsing of what Panetta actually said but potentially more important for some information on the guy who probably headed the briefing was Jose Rogriguez, the man who admits to having destroyed the tapes of the torturing.

So, yeah, I’d say that there is considerable question as to whether Pelosi is getting a fair shake. Frankly, we don’t know what has happened and “ya’ll” are just way to happy to nail her to a cross. Why? I don’t much care for Pelosi, either but are you being fair? I don’t think so. AND, a far more important issue is that torture was DONE. Frankly, I don’t care if the person is a Democrat or a Republican. I want those responsible for torture or for knowing but not trying to stop it, brought to justice. It is my very strong sense that is the position that any true American should and would take.

]]> By: Diana L. C. http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206347 Diana L. C. Mon, 18 May 2009 20:01:02 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206347 And please don't forget the broken caucus rules. For instance, in my state you cannot attend a party caucus to vote if you are not registered with that party and live in your caucus precinct. But we all know how that turned out: People's registration and addresses were not checked because of the overwhelming numbers of people who would show up. Who knows how many precincts they voted in or where they really lived? Some of the county chairmen did amazing jobs, staying up hours on end to do the verification that the precinct chairment did not do and reporting people to the state chairmen. Other county chairment didn't care, especially if they were for THE MESSIAH! These are state party rules. They may not be laws in your eyes, James Guglielmino, but in my eyes if you can't follow your own party rules, you don't care too much for your country's laws either. And please don’t forget the broken caucus rules. For instance, in my state you cannot attend a party caucus to vote if you are not registered with that party and live in your caucus precinct. But we all know how that turned out: People’s registration and addresses were not checked because of the overwhelming numbers of people who would show up. Who knows how many precincts they voted in or where they really lived? Some of the county chairmen did amazing jobs, staying up hours on end to do the verification that the precinct chairment did not do and reporting people to the state chairmen. Other county chairment didn’t care, especially if they were for THE MESSIAH! These are state party rules. They may not be laws in your eyes, James Guglielmino, but in my eyes if you can’t follow your own party rules, you don’t care too much for your country’s laws either.

]]> By: bayareavoter http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206325 bayareavoter Mon, 18 May 2009 18:54:24 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206325 Susan--watching this video and doing some reading over the weekend I am left wondering WHAT ARE PEOPLE THINKING? This is such a scary power grab with implications that should frighten all Americans. Susan–watching this video and doing some reading over the weekend I am left wondering WHAT ARE PEOPLE THINKING? This is such a scary power grab with implications that should frighten all Americans.

]]> By: sandi78 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206299 sandi78 Mon, 18 May 2009 17:45:39 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206299 James, any one of us would have accepted the result of the nominating process had it been done in an honest way. It was not. Instead the Democratic Party violated its own rules on multiple occasions to accomodate their desire to nominate Obama. Obama did not win the nomination by any measurement. He was awarded delegates he did not win and delegates were taken from Clinton and given to Obama. Those two actions are completely against the Rules. Then there's the abysmal excuse of a roll-call vote, where my vote from California was not even counted because had California called out their votes, it would have put Clinton ahead. For years I have encouraged people to vote, because every vote counts. Well, now it is clear that every vote does not count, at least in Democratic primaries. James, any one of us would have accepted the result of the nominating process had it been done in an honest way. It was not. Instead the Democratic Party violated its own rules on multiple occasions to accomodate their desire to nominate Obama. Obama did not win the nomination by any measurement. He was awarded delegates he did not win and delegates were taken from Clinton and given to Obama. Those two actions are completely against the Rules.

Then there’s the abysmal excuse of a roll-call vote, where my vote from California was not even counted because had California called out their votes, it would have put Clinton ahead.

For years I have encouraged people to vote, because every vote counts. Well, now it is clear that every vote does not count, at least in Democratic primaries.

]]> By: James Guglielmino http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/24749/what-goes-around-comes-around-the-end-justifies-the-means/#comment-1206251 James Guglielmino Mon, 18 May 2009 16:13:39 +0000 http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/?p=24749#comment-1206251 You have a poorly chosen nom de plume, Archimedes. The real Archimedes was a seeker of truth through science. You choose to call names indicating your intolerance for ideas foreign to you. Are you a xenophobe too? That would fit in with wingnut ideals that seem to make torture and illegal spying a part of our national moral fabric but disdain a President enforcing a law of the land and call him out as a violator of the Constitution for doing so. You have a poorly chosen nom de plume, Archimedes. The real Archimedes was a seeker of truth through science. You choose to call names indicating your intolerance for ideas foreign to you. Are you a xenophobe too? That would fit in with wingnut ideals that seem to make torture and illegal spying a part of our national moral fabric but disdain a President enforcing a law of the land and call him out as a violator of the Constitution for doing so.

]]>