Rand Paul:
Call me cynical, but I didn’t think his [Obama's] views on marriage could get any gayer.
We won't call Rand cynical. Ignorant, bigoted asshole is more fitting. An adult using ...
Happy Friday.
The best from Political Humor‘s collection of the week’s late night political humor.
"President Obama came out with approval of same-sex marriage. He said that over the years, he has ...
I've never understood Log Cabin Republicans - gay conservatives who give their support to a homophobic political party that derides their sexuality and refuses to grant them equal rights under ...
Finally.
“I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own ...
Election roundup:
Indiana.
As polls forecast, the Tea Party's efforts to cleanse the GOP of any impure conservatives has Dick Lugar out and teabagger Richard Mourdock in. Mourdock is the new Republican ...
There are lies...and then there are lies.
My own view, by the way, was that the auto companies needed to go through bankruptcy before government help. And frankly, that’s finally what ...
From the papers captured last year at Osama bin Laden's Pakistani hideout comes this.
Like any public figures, bin Laden and his advisers were mindful of the media. Adam Gadahn, one ...
The best from Political Humor‘s collection of the week’s late night political humor. Happy Friday.
"Today Mitt Romney visited a firehouse here in New York City. Of course, he was disappointed ...
It happened to Kerry. Can it happen to Obama? Nope says Margaret Carlson.
Obama’s belief system -- in that hopey-changey business and the post-partisanship thing -- has been altered by reality. ...
Sullivan:
What do Republicans call a gay man with neoconservative passion, a committed relationship and personal courage?
A faggot.
Exactly right, but then could one expect anything different from a political party that ...
And they claim that atheists are immoral?
The ugly side of religion shows its face once again. The words below were spoken at a Sunday sermon by Sean Harris, a pastor ...
It's been fun watching conservatives and Romney twist themselves into pretzels trying to undo Mitt's past words on GM and bin Laden.
Romney, April 2007:
It’s not worth moving heaven and earth ...
In an op-ed piece in the Washington Post, a couple of scholars from liberal and conservative think tanks, discuss the state of American politics.
We have been studying Washington politics and ...
Romney's VP-in-waiting, Marco Rubio, is perfecting the conservative sleaze play.
He has proposed his version of the Dream Act in which people who entered the country illegally as children will be ...
Beyond the rhetoric, the political BS, the lies - that is, the concerted effort by the right-wing noise machine to distort and misinform at every opportunity - is the very ...
It was never a matter of 'if'...only of 'when'.
Two constituencies that President Obama is holding onto about as strongly now as he did four years ago are voters under 30 ...
I'm not sure what one does with information of this sort but I thought it important you know. From Alex Pareene's new ebook, The Rude Guide To Mitt.
Every good Romney ...
Guess whose illustration made the May cover of a national magazine? Mine!
I'm quite sure there isn't much Stephen Moore/Newsmax and I share in common as far as politics goes but ...
Jesus (c. 30 CE):
Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's.
Bishop Daniel R. Jenky of the Catholic diocese of Peoria, Illinois (2012 ...
A new Tea Party group, Armed Forces Tea Party Patriots, has grown quickly since being launched last month by an active duty Marine Corps sergeant. The group, which vows to “stand up on the very soil we defended to preserve common sense conservatism and defend our Constitution that is threatened by a tyrannical government,” currently has over 400 members, who have signed up through its Facebook page, though many are not active duty military. And it has close ties to the broader Tea Party movement.
“My oath was to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and that oath will be kept. I wont’ “Just follow” orders. There is at this time a debate within the ranks of the military regarding their oath. Some mistakenly believe they must follow any order the President issues. But many others do understand that their loyalty is to the Constitution and to the people…”
According to this guy, every member of the military is free to interpret the Constitution as they wish (or, of course, listen to Glenn Beck and get a crash course on how NOT to interpret the Constitution) and disobey orders at will. Lovely. Experts on the military say this guy is walking a fine line between First Amendment rights and sedition.
Eight years of a corrupt, inept administration running roughshod over the Constitution and not a peep from the right. Get one liberal black guy in as President and they all come running out from the rocks they hide under yelling “Save the Constitution!”
Oh shutup already.
___
To receive new posts directly on your Facebook page, become a member of MarioPiperniDotCom’s fan page by clicking here or to receive email notifications of new posts, click on Subscribe. .
I get so disgusted when I see former or current military turning extreme. I served under President Reagan and although I didn’t vote for him, he was Commander in Chief and we were taught to respect him. It’s terrible that they don’t seem to be teaching this to our servicemen and women anymore, or if they are, so many are ignoring it.
Apparently, these military guys haven’t read the guidelines for when they can lawfully disobey an order. The guidelines are quite clear. They need to go back and read the book on military justice. My late husband was 20 Navy Ret. and he gave me a general sense of what it says. It says that to disobey an order you need to prove that the order is in direct conflict with higher orders that are already explicitly given and violates the mission, when an order is to kill unarmed civilians, when an order is to kill other military personnel without cause, when the order violates the military code of conduct, when the order willfully and unnecessarily endangers the lives of others without being a part of the mission. There are several other parameters but this gives a general sense that orders are given to complete a mission, have respect for human life, follow the Geneva conventions and other human rights treaties we are signatories to, and to adhere to the military code of conduct. Disobeying orders otherwise is a political act and if military personnel choose to disobey outside the guidelines, they are doing politics, not military conduct and their actions can land them in a courts martial. Being enticed to disregard the Commander-in-Chief because of the comments of political groups is a very foolish move that those military personnel should think long and hard about if they wish to serve their country with honor.
I get so disgusted when I see former or current military turning extreme. I served under President Reagan and although I didn’t vote for him, he was Commander in Chief and we were taught to respect him. It’s terrible that they don’t seem to be teaching this to our servicemen and women anymore, or if they are, so many are ignoring it.
Didn’t we notice the all volunteer military was moving this way all along? Have you checked out those wack jobs in Colorado Springs lately?
This guy already crossed the line into sedition. I think he’d prefer chaos and anarchy
Apparently, these military guys haven’t read the guidelines for when they can lawfully disobey an order. The guidelines are quite clear. They need to go back and read the book on military justice. My late husband was 20 Navy Ret. and he gave me a general sense of what it says. It says that to disobey an order you need to prove that the order is in direct conflict with higher orders that are already explicitly given and violates the mission, when an order is to kill unarmed civilians, when an order is to kill other military personnel without cause, when the order violates the military code of conduct, when the order willfully and unnecessarily endangers the lives of others without being a part of the mission. There are several other parameters but this gives a general sense that orders are given to complete a mission, have respect for human life, follow the Geneva conventions and other human rights treaties we are signatories to, and to adhere to the military code of conduct. Disobeying orders otherwise is a political act and if military personnel choose to disobey outside the guidelines, they are doing politics, not military conduct and their actions can land them in a courts martial. Being enticed to disregard the Commander-in-Chief because of the comments of political groups is a very foolish move that those military personnel should think long and hard about if they wish to serve their country with honor.