#1
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated ...
4th amendment, heard of it? Used to be the law of the land.
#2
Hey OLD SPOOK, as one old retired Cold War warrior to another, Sta ats si cherheit STASI techniques are the "in thing" unter der Big O's Verwaltung (administration) don't you know !
"As was reported earlier by Conservative Report, Cross Border Authority was denied." ....don't know anything about this blog, but it seems interesting....
#1
Well, only the President can issue the Cross Border Authority. However, anyone in the chain of command can deny it. So, all Valerie did was decide that the issue wasn't worth forwarding to the President. After all, he had a very important fund raiser the next day and he needed his beauty sleep.
Spit.
Posted by: Rambler in Virginia ||
08/08/2013 0:30 Comments ||
Top||
#3
Jarret is one of the reasons Obama is so hateful and dishonest - she is gasoline to his fire.
We the people are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.
Abraham Lincoln
You already know my opinion of Jarret and the consideration due. Didn't realize it got my post deleted the other day, but so what - I stand by it. Its an opinion, rhetoric, not a call for action. Argue as you wish... may have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.
#5
You already know my opinion of Jarret and the consideration due. Didn't realize it got my post deleted the other day, but so what - I stand by it. Its an opinion, rhetoric, not a call for action. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.
Your opinion - true. But it's not your name on the domain registry. You're a tenant at Rantburg, just like me. Except I get to clean up the messes. You also offering to foot the legal bills if there's a backlash?
Threatening a U.S. citizen with harm is a no-no at the Burg. That's been a standing policy.
Just to make it clear: Do not use words that can be interpreted to advocate, make the case for, or promote violence against a U.S. citizen.
Is that understood?
Will a "safety brief" have to be permanently displayed when the comments section comes up?
#6
Please, please be a gentleman about this, OldSpook. You were otherwise occupied during the R1ghth4aven nonsense, but at the time Fred's outcome was less certain than yours.
[Washington Post] The overwhelming sentiment coming out of President Obama's interview with "Tonight Show" host Jay Leno can be summed up like this: "Wow, Jay really asked serious questions."
Russia, Edward Snowden and the NSA were part of the conversation. So too was the increased terror alert. And Hillary Clinton's presidential prospects. There was relatively little "Hey how are the wife and kids" chatter that many people expected. (Leno did ask Obama how he spent his birthday; it wasn't a totally dry interview.)
No one who has watched the transformation of media -- and how politicians have learned to take advantage of those changes -- should be surprised, however.
Here's the reality: As the definition of who is a journalist has continued to expand, the line between "serious" and "fun" has blurred. There are examples of this phenomenon everywhere: the success of BuzzFeed and the rise of "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report" as a primary news source for many people being the two most obvious.
Posted by: Fred ||
08/08/2013 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[8 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Seven trips now to California to visit and appear with Leno, a man who uses him as the butt of humour? I have a question. Whom or what is he really visiting in California ?
Back in the 60s, television 'allowed' sci-fi programs, like Twilight Zone and Star Trek, to address serious issues of the day, but would never allow those issues to be directly addressed in their other programming. Today, those serious issues are off the table for the Party Media, aka MinTruth, and its apparatchiks, but allowed in other venues. News is Entertainment, Entertainment is News.
#6
"Wow, Jay really asked serious questions."
Seriously? I am fairly convinced that this was a mostly scripted encounter for which our CIC (Comic in Chief) was completely briefed in advance. Oh and BTW his answers all fairly long winded as usual were the usual generalities that could have been stated by anybody and the usual sprinkling of flat out lies, e.g. "we cut the deficity in half" - LOL. I agree with Rush, everytime he speaks in an unserious venue or an unserious way he diminishes the American Presidency an additional notch and I'm sure this does not go unnoticed on the world stage, only by the blind liberals here at home.
#7
The interview worked very well for Obama, IMO. He came across much less arrogant and condescending than usual, and the questions were not that hard.
#3
Webb Hubbell's ghost will be so proud of Chelsea
Posted by: Frank G on the road ||
08/08/2013 13:29 Comments ||
Top||
#4
I don't see it. The Dems never nominate the guy (gal) who is next in line. They nominate "someone else." There are exceptions of course (Gore - 2000) but most of the supposed heirs appearant (remember Howard Dean?) get tossed.
Hillary was the heir appearant in 2008. Champ came from nowhere and beat her. How many Dems get 2 bites at the presidential apple?
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
