goemaw.com

General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: sonofdaxjones on June 20, 2013, 12:52:42 AM

Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 20, 2013, 12:52:42 AM
you ask to many questions.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/michael-hastings-rolling-stone-contributor-dead-at-33-20130618#ixzz2WexolsVp
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 20, 2013, 01:06:03 AM
who killed him, Dax? CIA for his recent stuff or DoD for past transgressions?
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on June 20, 2013, 06:09:59 AM
Was it barry o?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 20, 2013, 07:27:39 AM
who killed him, Dax? CIA for his recent stuff or DoD for past transgressions?


 :dunno:


Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: CNS on June 20, 2013, 11:05:50 AM
This has Triads written all over it.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OK_Cat on June 20, 2013, 11:09:09 AM
thanks obama
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 20, 2013, 03:54:02 PM
Wow, a Mercedes that went up like a '78 Ford Pinto.

Amazing
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EMAWmeister on June 20, 2013, 04:01:18 PM
Wow, a Mercedes that went up like a '78 Ford Pinto.

Amazing

That is kinda weird.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Headinjun on June 20, 2013, 11:21:13 PM
who killed him, Dax? CIA for his recent stuff or DoD for past transgressions?

Any ounce of possibility? 

Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 20, 2013, 11:32:51 PM
We all remember how infamously combustible the 78 pinto was.
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: puniraptor on June 20, 2013, 11:56:51 PM
Classic fiery car crash. His death was faked and he has been assigned a new identity.
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 21, 2013, 07:02:05 AM
Where are the snowdens of yesteryear?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: 8manpick on June 21, 2013, 07:05:16 AM
#classic
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: star seed 7 on June 21, 2013, 03:16:56 PM
DAXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Quote
By Tim Stanley
Last updated: June 19th, 2013

WikiLeaks just threw some gasoline onto the conspiracy fire. On Wednesday night, they Tweeted: “Michael Hastings contacted WikiLeaks lawyer Jennifer Robinson just a few hours before he died, saying that the FBI was investigating him.”

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/hastings-crash-witness-113514329.html
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: CNS on June 21, 2013, 03:23:10 PM
Guy was too young for the Chaves Ray.  Had to make it quick and also help Chystler save some face about their cars being rhe only ones blowing up.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 21, 2013, 03:25:29 PM
He man, it was a small Benz, everyone knows they just detonate after a collision with a tree and sound like a "bomb went off".

Move along


Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on June 21, 2013, 04:22:50 PM
National Defense Authorization Act ya'll.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on June 21, 2013, 04:37:05 PM
"And for all 3 of those normal reasons, which account for virtually all car fires in modern cars, the fire would have started in the engine compartment, progressed slowly, and scorched the hell out of the paint before ever reaching the gas tank"

"whenever  I'd been reporting around groups of dudes whose job it was to kill people. one of them would usually mention that they were going to kill me" Michael Hastings

Michael Hastings contacted WikiLeaks lawyer Jennifer Robinson just a few hours before he died, saying that the FBI was investigating him
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on June 21, 2013, 04:55:58 PM
he was telling a lot of folks about going under the radar because of an FBI investigation:

http://laist.com/2013/06/21/michael_hastings_told_friends_he_wa.php
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on June 21, 2013, 05:32:49 PM
Barry O kills another poor soul
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on June 21, 2013, 05:46:58 PM
Just like princess di
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: wetwillie on June 21, 2013, 05:50:39 PM
T's and p's to the wiki leaks lawyers family.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on June 21, 2013, 09:53:14 PM
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/06/michael_hastings_red_light_video_speeding.php (http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/06/michael_hastings_red_light_video_speeding.php)

Quote
Raigorodsky and his wife Mila were asleep when they heard "a very loud crash." Mila says that there was "a boom and then a flash. The flash was so bright, it lit up the room," even though their bedroom curtains were drawn.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on June 21, 2013, 10:08:24 PM
Barry O kills another poor soul

Killed jobs, killed the middle class, and now this dude.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: SdK on June 21, 2013, 10:21:28 PM
Quote
...death may come invisible or in holy ball of fire...
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on June 21, 2013, 10:45:20 PM
Barry O kills another poor soul

Killed jobs, killed the middle class, and now this dude.

yes, makes sense
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 23, 2013, 02:57:56 PM
Barry O kills another poor soul

Killed jobs, killed the middle class, and now this dude.


Bullshit, bullshit, and more bullshit. 

If anyone killed this dude, it was the FBI/military.  He took down and exposed General McChrystal and his staff's disdain for their superiors, which included Vice President Biden and President Obama. 

As far as jobs under Obama are concerned, here are the facts:

http://factcheck.org/2013/04/obamas-numbers-quarterly-update/ (http://factcheck.org/2013/04/obamas-numbers-quarterly-update/)

Quote
Jobs: Obama Beats Bush

Now that we have figures for the full four years of Obama’s first term, a surprising fact emerges: The economy added more jobs during four years under Obama than it did in the entire eight years under Bush.

By the time of Obama’s second inaugural in January, the economy had added a net total of 1,208,000 jobs since he was first sworn in four years earlier, according to current figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That beats George W. Bush’s eight-year total of 1,083,000.

And so far, Obama is extending his lead over Bush. Counting jobs added in February, his total now stands at a net gain of over 1.5 million jobs.

Neither president’s record is good by historical standards, especially when compared with the 22.8 million jobs added during Bill Clinton’s eight years in office. The Bush years were hampered by a recession and prolonged job slump that began within weeks of his taking office in 2001, and later by the devastating recession of 2007-2009.

The economy lost 8.7 million jobs as a result of the 2007-2009 recession, the worst since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Those losses included 4.4 million jobs lost during Bush’s final year, and another 4.3 million during Obama’s first 13 months in office. But since then, all the jobs initially lost under Obama have been regained, plus another 1,564,000.




Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on June 23, 2013, 03:30:40 PM
@OregonSmock.


Would you stroke Barry's shaft if he asked you to?


Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on June 23, 2013, 03:32:35 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQrHnP9lXIU


Mark Dice is the bomb.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 23, 2013, 03:35:55 PM
I should have remembered not to get into a debate with an idiot.  They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.  Some people are just too stupid to reason with.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on June 23, 2013, 03:37:33 PM
I should have remembered not to get into a debate with an idiot.  They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.  Some people are just too stupid to reason with.
That is a yes?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 23, 2013, 03:48:34 PM
I should have remembered not to get into a debate with an idiot.  They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.  Some people are just too stupid to reason with.
That is a yes?



I could ask you the same question regarding Alex Jones, but I'm not a mouth-breathing bigot, so I won't stoop to your level.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kim carnes on June 23, 2013, 06:59:17 PM
He was killed by the government.  Cars don't just explode, this isn't a movie. 
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on June 23, 2013, 07:14:21 PM
Barry O kills another poor soul

Killed jobs, killed the middle class, and now this dude.


Bullshit, bullshit, and more bullshit. 

If anyone killed this dude, it was the FBI/military.  He took down and exposed General McChrystal and his staff's disdain for their superiors, which included Vice President Biden and President Obama. 

As far as jobs under Obama are concerned, here are the facts:

http://factcheck.org/2013/04/obamas-numbers-quarterly-update/ (http://factcheck.org/2013/04/obamas-numbers-quarterly-update/)

Quote
Jobs: Obama Beats Bush

Now that we have figures for the full four years of Obama’s first term, a surprising fact emerges: The economy added more jobs during four years under Obama than it did in the entire eight years under Bush.

By the time of Obama’s second inaugural in January, the economy had added a net total of 1,208,000 jobs since he was first sworn in four years earlier, according to current figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. That beats George W. Bush’s eight-year total of 1,083,000.

And so far, Obama is extending his lead over Bush. Counting jobs added in February, his total now stands at a net gain of over 1.5 million jobs.

Neither president’s record is good by historical standards, especially when compared with the 22.8 million jobs added during Bill Clinton’s eight years in office. The Bush years were hampered by a recession and prolonged job slump that began within weeks of his taking office in 2001, and later by the devastating recession of 2007-2009.

The economy lost 8.7 million jobs as a result of the 2007-2009 recession, the worst since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Those losses included 4.4 million jobs lost during Bush’s final year, and another 4.3 million during Obama’s first 13 months in office. But since then, all the jobs initially lost under Obama have been regained, plus another 1,564,000.

I was trolling, Beems, sheesh.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on June 23, 2013, 09:06:42 PM
I should have remembered not to get into a debate with an idiot.  They'll bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.  Some people are just too stupid to reason with.
That is a yes?



I could ask you the same question regarding Alex Jones, but I'm not a mouth-breathing bigot, so I won't stoop to your level.
Alex Jones is a maniac. That is his brand.  I hate the way he delivers the information. Its fear mongering at its finest. I just praise jones for what he has done regarding the Bohemian Grove/Bilderberg Group. I am sorry it is hard for you to belive that your beloved Barack Obama is not representing the American public. He is a product of big special interests groups in Wall Street. The guy is a thug.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Brock Landers on June 23, 2013, 09:51:36 PM
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/06/michael_hastings_red_light_video_speeding.php (http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/06/michael_hastings_red_light_video_speeding.php)

Quote
Raigorodsky and his wife Mila were asleep when they heard "a very loud crash." Mila says that there was "a boom and then a flash. The flash was so bright, it lit up the room," even though their bedroom curtains were drawn.

Obviously a drone strike.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on June 23, 2013, 10:11:57 PM
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/06/michael_hastings_red_light_video_speeding.php (http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/06/michael_hastings_red_light_video_speeding.php)

Quote
Raigorodsky and his wife Mila were asleep when they heard "a very loud crash." Mila says that there was "a boom and then a flash. The flash was so bright, it lit up the room," even though their bedroom curtains were drawn.

Obviously a drone strike.

"Drone him, turkey no mayo" - Obama when asked what to do about Michael Hastings and lunch.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kim carnes on June 23, 2013, 10:27:09 PM
Pretty sad that you barbarians are cracking jokes about this.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on June 23, 2013, 10:34:41 PM
http://intellihub.com/2013/06/23/nobodys-safe-car-hacking-the-latest-advanced-form-of-assassination/

Mark Dice explaining how this is possible and that it is not some "crazy conspiracy theory".  Does this mean that Hastings was a victim of it? Maybe, maybe not. Nobody will ever know why he was driving at crazy speeds in town and crashed into a tree.

The saddest part of it all is that we lost a great investigative journalist. We need more people like Michael Hastings in journalism. People with courage and conviction who will stand up to corruption. RIP
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 24, 2013, 12:51:27 AM
Quote
It is now widely speculated that Hastings was possibly murdered by remote takeover of his car’s controls.

Quote
“Is this the latest new method of assassination?”, Dice asked.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 24, 2013, 09:10:43 AM
Gotta admit, pretty Putin Like of Obama.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on June 24, 2013, 09:12:26 AM
Quote
It is now widely speculated that Hastings was possibly murdered by remote takeover of his car’s controls.

Quote
“Is this the latest new method of assassination?”, Dice asked.

makes sense?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: CNS on June 24, 2013, 09:29:25 AM
All of my remote contol cars, when growing up, had the Explode crap button too.  So, yeah.  Makes sense.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on June 24, 2013, 11:59:48 PM
http://www.infowars.com/richard-clarke-hastings-accident-consistent-with-a-car-cyber-attack/


“I’m not a conspiracy guy. In fact, I’ve spent most of my life knocking down conspiracy theories,” said Clarke. “But my rule has always been you don’t knock down a conspiracy theory until you can prove it [wrong]. And in the case of Michael Hastings, what evidence is available publicly is consistent with a car cyber attack. And the problem with that is you can’t prove it.”
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EMAWmeister on June 25, 2013, 12:09:56 AM
"I'm not a conspiracy nut, and here's this infowars link to prove it."

FWIW something does seem off about this situation. Hastings may have been piss drunk and driving 100+, Ryan Dunn style.
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 25, 2013, 12:59:38 AM
I like the rule where you have to prove it wrong.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Institutional Control on June 25, 2013, 07:05:55 AM
I like the rule where you have to prove it wrong.

Greatest rule ever.
Title: Re: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: 8manpick on June 25, 2013, 07:19:26 AM
I like the rule where you have to prove it wrong.

Greatest rule ever.
Seems like every good conspiracy theory is just vague enough to avoid that rule.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 25, 2013, 09:51:02 AM
Hey, I mean why should anyone question the some what mysterious death of a reporter who asked a lot of hard questions, didn't by the bull$hit corporate line from the least transparent administration in U.S. history, and was reportedly being investigated by the FBI.

But, we live in a world where MSM shills now think the few journalists left who actually ask hard questions and break stories should be charged with treason.    We live in a world where the gov't taps the phone lines of news agencies (amazingly a new agency that have been nothing less than a huge cheerleader for the administation in the past) and hacks the computers of other journalists who ask hard questions.

Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 25, 2013, 10:21:20 AM
Telling your friends you're being investigated by the FBI is not quite the same as "reportedly being investigated by the FBI."
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: CNS on June 25, 2013, 10:28:10 AM
The mailman for my office tells us that the feds are watching him HARD!  He has a small farm on the side and said that every time he is on his tractor, he can see two or more of them just inside the woods watching him.  Also, he said that they are watching him during his mail routes and that they are actively listening to him via his smart phone even when he isn't actively on a call.

The last time he spoke to my coworker he told us that he is prepared to make them leave him alone next time he sees them.  We, being good sheep/slaves, reported him the next time we were in the post office out of fear of him killing someone.

He is still out driving around and delivering mail, so Obama either reprimanded him hard but fair, or he is too small timey to make his Outback explode. 
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on June 25, 2013, 10:41:44 AM
Telling your friends you're being investigated by the FBI is not quite the same as "reportedly being investigated by the FBI."

So he contacts Wikileaks attorney, emails friends saying he believes he is being investigated while he is on to a "big story" then decides to go out and get shitfaced and drive around Melrose Ave as fast as he can? Nothing to see here right?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on June 25, 2013, 10:44:36 AM
Quote
consistent with a car cyber attack.

Well yeah, there's clearly been enough car cyber attacks to establish consistency.

But yeah, this website is great:

Quote
Despite the overwhelming evidence that Michael Hastings was targeted and assassinated for his journalism

Quote
Prior to his murder, Hastings said the Obama administration had declared war on the press.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on June 25, 2013, 10:54:07 AM
go back to bed America

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR3KwODDzeY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR3KwODDzeY)
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on June 25, 2013, 12:18:58 PM
go back to bed America

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR3KwODDzeY (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eR3KwODDzeY)

Love Bill  :love:
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 25, 2013, 12:34:30 PM
We should probably check on that Facebook girl who was reportedly being investigated by the CIA.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: CNS on June 25, 2013, 12:43:34 PM
We should probably check on that Facebook girl who was reportedly being investigated by the CIA.


There have been multiple small "boom"'s around the area my office is in the last couple days.  Yet I saw the mailman this morning! 

You gotta keep....that...dirt of yo shoulder.

That said, the man does practically drive for a living so he probs knows the protocol to overcome remote control speed up/crash into something fiery scenarios perpetrated by Big Farm Surveillance.  Classic mailman training stuff.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 25, 2013, 03:37:43 PM
Barry Vlad Obama . . . sounds good.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Dugout DickStone on June 25, 2013, 03:46:02 PM
Hey, I mean why should anyone question the some what mysterious death of a reporter who asked a lot of hard questions, didn't by the bull$hit corporate line from the least transparent administration in U.S. history, and was reportedly being investigated by the FBI.

But, we live in a world where MSM shills now think the few journalists left who actually ask hard questions and break stories should be charged with treason.    We live in a world where the gov't taps the phone lines of news agencies (amazingly a new agency that have been nothing less than a huge cheerleader for the administation in the past) and hacks the computers of other journalists who ask hard questions.

While I am not a conspiracy nut I do find it ironic that it used to be the media that secretly taped the Gov and now its the other way around.  Sweet, sweet, irony.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 25, 2013, 03:51:53 PM
You mean a media the secretly taped gov't officials engaged in illegal activities??

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on June 26, 2013, 09:19:13 AM
It's pathetic how tickled the goE left is that this guy is dead.  There was a time when the left would have gone apes hit over something like this.  Now they're all a bunch of police state Nazis marching in stride with Adolph Obama
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 26, 2013, 01:48:26 PM
It's pathetic how tickled the goE left is that this guy is dead.  There was a time when the left would have gone apes hit over something like this.  Now they're all a bunch of police state Nazis marching in stride with Adolph Obama

Totally agree . . . the guy was an important cog in wrecking the lie of "Hope and Change" and thus progressives must do everything they can to destroy his legacy and pooh-pooh away any thoughts of suspicion surrounding his death.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 26, 2013, 01:55:07 PM
It's pathetic how tickled the goE left is that this guy is dead.  There was a time when the left would have gone apes hit over something like this.  Now they're all a bunch of police state Nazis marching in stride with Adolph Obama

Totally agree . . . the guy was an important cog in wrecking the lie of "Hope and Change" and thus progressives must do everything they can to destroy his legacy and pooh-pooh away any thoughts of suspicion surrounding his death.


I see stupid people.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 26, 2013, 01:58:33 PM
It's pathetic how tickled the goE left is that this guy is dead.  There was a time when the left would have gone apes hit over something like this.  Now they're all a bunch of police state Nazis marching in stride with Adolph Obama

Totally agree . . . the guy was an important cog in wrecking the lie of "Hope and Change" and thus progressives must do everything they can to destroy his legacy and pooh-pooh away any thoughts of suspicion surrounding his death.


I see stupid people.

Well look, one of the chief Obama apologists in residence can't handle reality.

Sad, but not surprising.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 26, 2013, 02:10:40 PM
It's pathetic how tickled the goE left is that this guy is dead.  There was a time when the left would have gone apes hit over something like this.  Now they're all a bunch of police state Nazis marching in stride with Adolph Obama

Totally agree . . . the guy was an important cog in wrecking the lie of "Hope and Change" and thus progressives must do everything they can to destroy his legacy and pooh-pooh away any thoughts of suspicion surrounding his death.


I see stupid people.

Well look, one of the chief Obama apologists in residence can't handle reality.

Sad, but not surprising.


Reality? 


 :lol:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 26, 2013, 02:13:23 PM
Dead journalists, hacked news agency computers etc. etc.

Barry Putin-Obama

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on June 26, 2013, 02:13:51 PM
It's pathetic how tickled the goE left is that this guy is dead.  There was a time when the left would have gone apes hit over something like this.  Now they're all a bunch of police state Nazis marching in stride with Adolph Obama

Totally agree . . . the guy was an important cog in wrecking the lie of "Hope and Change" and thus progressives must do everything they can to destroy his legacy and pooh-pooh away any thoughts of suspicion surrounding his death.

Honest question, what progressive has attempted to "destroy" his legacy? Besides the dry, middle of the road NYT obit.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 26, 2013, 02:15:31 PM
Dead journalists, hacked news agency computers etc. etc.

Barry Putin-Obama


 :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 26, 2013, 02:17:03 PM
Dead journalists?  Thanks Obama!

Hacked computers?  Thanks Obama!

No cure for cancer?  Thanks Obama!


 :shakesfist:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 26, 2013, 02:17:27 PM
Sad.

Journalistic Freedoom!!!  . . . Unless their investigating and exposing the corruption and attack on civil liberties by a Progressive Liberal Presidency.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 26, 2013, 02:24:55 PM
Sad.

Journalistic Freedoom!!!  . . . Unless their investigating and exposing the corruption and attack on civil liberties by a Progressive Liberal Presidency.


WTF are you talking about?  By the way, please look up the difference between "their" and "they're."  It would also help if you could actually spell the word "freedom."


 :thumbsup:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on June 26, 2013, 02:27:34 PM
Requesting linkage to progressives destroying Hastings plz
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: star seed 7 on June 26, 2013, 02:27:55 PM
We should probably check on that Facebook girl who was reportedly being investigated by the CIA.

saw her out in aggieville this weekend.  she was fairly frantic, but still alive.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: yoman on June 26, 2013, 02:29:04 PM
I love Dax threads. It's just like reading the Drudge report except not having to deal with their god-awful font. Keep it up Dax  :bwpopcorn:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 26, 2013, 02:33:12 PM
Sad.

Journalistic Freedoom!!!  . . . Unless their investigating and exposing the corruption and attack on civil liberties by a Progressive Liberal Presidency.


WTF are you talking about?  By the way, please look up the difference between "their" and "they're."  It would also help if you could actually spell the word "freedom."


 :thumbsup:

When you become the grammar and spelling police on a message board, you've lost.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 26, 2013, 02:38:16 PM
Sad.

Journalistic Freedoom!!!  . . . Unless their investigating and exposing the corruption and attack on civil liberties by a Progressive Liberal Presidency.


WTF are you talking about?  By the way, please look up the difference between "their" and "they're."  It would also help if you could actually spell the word "freedom."


 :thumbsup:

When you become the grammar and spelling police on a message board, you've lost.


All I'm saying is that your psycho babble might be easier to read if you were functionally literate.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 26, 2013, 03:18:00 PM
Sad.

Journalistic Freedoom!!!  . . . Unless their investigating and exposing the corruption and attack on civil liberties by a Progressive Liberal Presidency.


WTF are you talking about?  By the way, please look up the difference between "their" and "they're."  It would also help if you could actually spell the word "freedom."


 :thumbsup:

When you become the grammar and spelling police on a message board, you've lost.


All I'm saying is that your psycho babble might be easier to read if you were functionally literate.

Just because you're all pissed off at the the lie that was "Hope and Change" and left with nitpicking a fat fingered extra "e" and the usage of "they're" and "their" (and in the context I was thinking, I don't think I was incorrect in its usage) . . . doesn't mean you have to go all passive aggressive/bi-polar on me . . . friend.


Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 26, 2013, 03:29:59 PM
Sad.

Journalistic Freedoom!!!  . . . Unless their investigating and exposing the corruption and attack on civil liberties by a Progressive Liberal Presidency.


WTF are you talking about?  By the way, please look up the difference between "their" and "they're."  It would also help if you could actually spell the word "freedom."


 :thumbsup:

When you become the grammar and spelling police on a message board, you've lost.


All I'm saying is that your psycho babble might be easier to read if you were functionally literate.

Just because you're all pissed off at the the lie that was "Hope and Change" and left with nitpicking a fat fingered extra "e" and the usage of "they're" and "their" (and in the context I was thinking, I don't think I was incorrect in its usage) . . . doesn't mean you have to go all passive aggressive/bi-polar on me . . . friend.


Sorry, Dax.  It just irritates me that an otherwise intelligent person thinks that President Obama is responsible for the death of a really courageous journalist like Michael Hastings.  I realize that the government is an over-bloated, bureaucratic mess, but come on, man. 

As for grammar, just remember that "they're" is a combination of "they are."  "Their" is possessive (belongs to someone), and "there" is a place. 
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 26, 2013, 04:05:10 PM
Ben, most Obama supporters actually believed things like FISA, indefinite detention, Patriot Act and things of that ilk would disappear once he became president.    The exact oppossite happend.

Most Obama supporters actually believed the "most transparent administration in history", the exact oppossite has happened.

and on and on and on.

Now, the most significant domestic spying case by the gov't in US history.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on June 26, 2013, 09:00:58 PM
Ben, most Obama supporters actually believed things like FISA, indefinite detention, Patriot Act and things of that ilk would disappear once he became president.    The exact oppossite happend.

Most Obama supporters actually believed the "most transparent administration in history", the exact oppossite has happened.

and on and on and on.

Now, the most significant domestic spying case by the gov't in US history.

Right and that's mostly all true but I'm not sure how you can claim that progressives have not already noticed this. Hastings and other journos of his ilk, Taibbi, Greenwald, Scahill, etc, etc, have been all over the administration and have laid blame directly to Obama in many cases. But you're suggesting that there's evidence that there is a serious effort to ruin Hastings credibility in order to protect the fact that Obama killed him and that its the progressives who are behind it?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 06:40:28 AM
Ben, most Obama supporters actually believed things like FISA, indefinite detention, Patriot Act and things of that ilk would disappear once he became president.    The exact oppossite happend.

Most Obama supporters actually believed the "most transparent administration in history", the exact oppossite has happened.

and on and on and on.

Now, the most significant domestic spying case by the gov't in US history.

Right and that's mostly all true but I'm not sure how you can claim that progressives have not already noticed this. Hastings and other journos of his ilk, Taibbi, Greenwald, Scahill, etc, etc, have been all over the administration and have laid blame directly to Obama in many cases. But you're suggesting that there's evidence that there is a serious effort to ruin Hastings credibility in order to protect the fact that Obama killed him and that its the progressives who are behind it?

Maybe not in general (at least outside of this board), but their are noted left leaners in the MSM who sound like they're, well, relieved . . . and this has been yet another hallmark story which shows how far many of them are in the tank for this administration.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/jeff-cohen/50281/snowden-coverage-if-us-mass-media-were-state-controlled-would-they-look-any-different

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 06:48:43 AM
Oh, and I couldn't agree with this comment in the smirking chimp blog entry/column I posted more, if you really want to know what the U.S. is up to, particularly overseas you simply can't rely on the U.S. media:

Try listening to anybody's news but ours. Visit Europe, for instance, and watch the news there. Sometimes it doesn't even sound like they're reporting about the same planet. Our media has stuck to their government-fed "talking points" since before the 2002 invasion of Afghanistan. Topics most of the population would like to see openly discussed (even, or perhaps especially if they're not sure where they stand) are utterly ignored because they're not on the list of "acceptable topics". If you're a public figure and dare bring one of the off-the-table topics up (example: financial transaction tax) you're immediately dubbed a "crackpot" and disappear from the mainstream media. This is government control of the media, whether the idiots on the front line like to call it that or not. If memory serves, the rule is "if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, chances are, its a duck."
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: puniraptor on June 27, 2013, 08:03:00 AM
Thank god North West and Chris Brown are government approved talking points.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on June 27, 2013, 08:14:43 AM
you think barry smoked him dax?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 08:20:16 AM
you think barry smoked him dax?

 :dunno:   

I just enjoy reading people trying to explain how there's no way that could happen. 
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on June 27, 2013, 08:26:59 AM
you think barry smoked him dax?

 :dunno:   

I just enjoy reading people trying to explain how there's no way that could happen.

you think the remote controlled car takeover theory has any legs?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on June 27, 2013, 08:30:57 AM
you think barry smoked him dax?

 :dunno:   

I just enjoy reading people trying to explain how there's no way that could happen.

you think the remote controlled car takeover theory has any legs?

absolutely
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OK_Cat on June 27, 2013, 08:31:24 AM
you ever see die hard?  of course it's possible
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 08:35:27 AM
you think barry smoked him dax?

 :dunno:   

I just enjoy reading people trying to explain how there's no way that could happen.

you think the remote controlled car takeover theory has any legs?

I don't know, clearly the modern vehicle with their own version of the proverbial "black box" and computer modules and software lends credence to the possibility of hacking, but remotely?   I suspect with the increasing availability of Blue Tooth, Satellite connectivity etc. etc. in cars that would provide a conduit via which remote take over could happen, but it still seems a bit far fetched.    I don't know
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on June 27, 2013, 09:38:53 AM
Ben, most Obama supporters actually believed things like FISA, indefinite detention, Patriot Act and things of that ilk would disappear once he became president.    The exact oppossite happend.

Most Obama supporters actually believed the "most transparent administration in history", the exact oppossite has happened.

and on and on and on.

Now, the most significant domestic spying case by the gov't in US history.

Right and that's mostly all true but I'm not sure how you can claim that progressives have not already noticed this. Hastings and other journos of his ilk, Taibbi, Greenwald, Scahill, etc, etc, have been all over the administration and have laid blame directly to Obama in many cases. But you're suggesting that there's evidence that there is a serious effort to ruin Hastings credibility in order to protect the fact that Obama killed him and that its the progressives who are behind it?

Maybe not in general (at least outside of this board), but their are noted left leaners in the MSM who sound like they're, well, relieved . . . and this has been yet another hallmark story which shows how far many of them are in the tank for this administration.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/jeff-cohen/50281/snowden-coverage-if-us-mass-media-were-state-controlled-would-they-look-any-different

I'm with that there are a lot of notable people who've gone against Greenwald but we've gone from progressives to "left-leaners". A big difference.

That article notes David Gregory whose conflict of interest has always been with conservatives (Bush threw him a party on his 30th birthday) and Andrew Ross Sorkin who, given his relationship with Wall Street, could never be a progressive.

I don't watch news programs but I'm sure there's a bunch of situations like this playing out, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJgnJ_W_5zU (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJgnJ_W_5zU) which is entirely frustrating and gives your point credence.

But from someone that spends time reading about the progressive perspective I don't agree with your premise that its coming from their point of view, or that they are in the tank for Obama.

Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 27, 2013, 10:39:28 AM
Quote me a notable progressive/left leaner who is "relieved".
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 12:02:28 PM
Quote me a notable progressive/left leaner who is "relieved".

The general demeanor.

Sorry Felix Rex, but at this juncture, your every post reminds me of this . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqjQG-Tw9FY

Don't know why . . . don't shoot me bro.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 27, 2013, 12:17:15 PM
"The general demeanor?"


 :flush:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kim carnes on June 27, 2013, 12:19:06 PM
the gov't killed this guy
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: jmlynch1 on June 27, 2013, 12:26:50 PM
I want Gene Hackman's opinion
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Unruly on June 27, 2013, 01:11:40 PM
Can someone please....

FIND JA RULE?!?!

I need to make sense of all this.

Guide me Ja.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: SkinnyBenny on June 27, 2013, 01:17:31 PM
Sad.

Journalistic Freedoom!!!  . . . Unless their investigating and exposing the corruption and attack on civil liberties by a Progressive Liberal Presidency.


WTF are you talking about?  By the way, please look up the difference between "their" and "they're."  It would also help if you could actually spell the word "freedom."


 :thumbsup:

When you become the grammar and spelling police on a message board, you've lost.

Dude, when you need to be corrected on the most elementary principles of usage (seriously, most people learn these in elementary school), you do serious damage to your credibility as a competent arguer. Trying to flip it around by calling him a "grammar nazi" and going like this  :don'tcare: and assuming the position of an anti-intellectual who is too good to master basic traits of the language just makes you look really desperate. Sorry. It's suuuuuper easy. Take two seconds to learn it, then you'll be able to resume arguing and you might actually seem like a competent mind while doing it.


Also, who is Michael Hastings?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on June 27, 2013, 01:39:39 PM
Also, who is Michael Hastings?

Just another dead body at the hands of the Obama administration
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 01:45:18 PM
Sad.

Journalistic Freedoom!!!  . . . Unless their investigating and exposing the corruption and attack on civil liberties by a Progressive Liberal Presidency.


WTF are you talking about?  By the way, please look up the difference between "their" and "they're."  It would also help if you could actually spell the word "freedom."


 :thumbsup:

When you become the grammar and spelling police on a message board, you've lost.

Dude, when you need to be corrected on the most elementary principles of usage (seriously, most people learn these in elementary school), you do serious damage to your credibility as a competent arguer. Trying to flip it around by calling him a "grammar nazi" and going like this  :don'tcare: and assuming the position of an anti-intellectual who is too good to master basic traits of the language just makes you look really desperate. Sorry. It's suuuuuper easy. Take two seconds to learn it, then you'll be able to resume arguing and you might actually seem like a competent mind while doing it.


Also, who is Michael Hastings?

Go back to worrying yourself sick over two different colors of turf. 

"anti-intellectual" WTF??  LOL

(a variation of) Godwin's Law in 1 post, great work Skinny!!


Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 27, 2013, 02:03:24 PM
Quote me a notable progressive/left leaner who is "relieved".

The general demeanor.

Sorry Felix Rex, but at this juncture, your every post reminds me of this . . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqjQG-Tw9FY

Don't know why . . . don't shoot me bro.

Link?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 02:07:38 PM
I don't have a link it's just general observation. 

You seem to be kind of upset about this though Felix.   Sorry bro
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on June 27, 2013, 02:12:04 PM
Oh man

http://youtu.be/3D6jxBDy8k8 (http://youtu.be/3D6jxBDy8k8)
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on June 27, 2013, 02:23:02 PM
I don't have a link it's just general observation. 

You seem to be kind of upset about this though Felix.   Sorry bro

So your claim that progressives/left-leaners are relieved and/or working in unison to discredit Michael Hastings, his work, and activist journalism wholly with an end goal of protecting Obama from being linked to a car-assassination plot is all based on a "general observation"?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on June 27, 2013, 02:23:50 PM
I don't have a link it's just general observation. 

You seem to be kind of upset about this though Felix.   Sorry bro

So your claim that progressives/left-leaners are relieved and/or working in unison to discredit Michael Hastings, his work, and activist journalism wholly with an end goal of protecting Obama from being linked to a car-assassination plot is all based on a "general observation"?

makes sense?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 02:40:39 PM
I don't have a link it's just general observation. 

You seem to be kind of upset about this though Felix.   Sorry bro

So your claim that progressives/left-leaners are relieved and/or working in unison to discredit Michael Hastings, his work, and activist journalism wholly with an end goal of protecting Obama from being linked to a car-assassination plot is all based on a "general observation"?

When you have an immediate, seemingly lockstep response from them MSM to discredit, pooh-pooh, and tamp down all thought and inquiry by non MSM types into the events that led to Hastings death, it's a reasonable response for any observer . . . 'a whew, I can jump on this and nip this in the bud right now and move on' mindset. 
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 27, 2013, 02:51:29 PM
Yeah, only the real independent thinkers out there believe that the POTUS is sitting around at night, plotting ways to assassinate rogue journalists.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 02:52:33 PM
Yeah, only the real independent thinkers out there believe that the POTUS is sitting around at night, plotting ways to assassinate rogue journalists.

The POTUS was directly involved in picking out which families to kill with Drone Strikes.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 27, 2013, 02:55:27 PM
Yeah, only the real independent thinkers out there believe that the POTUS is sitting around at night, plotting ways to assassinate rogue journalists.

The POTUS was directly involved in picking out which families to kill with Drone Strikes.


Yep, all those poor, innocent families out there who were droned in the middle of the night, right after they got done watching "Dancing with the Stars."
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 27, 2013, 02:55:33 PM
Now worries, Dax. I know links are hard to find. Me and you, we're still cool though.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 02:56:12 PM
Yeah, only the real independent thinkers out there believe that the POTUS is sitting around at night, plotting ways to assassinate rogue journalists.

The POTUS was directly involved in picking out which families to kill with Drone Strikes.


Yep, all those poor, innocent families out there who were droned in the middle of the night, right after they got done watching "Dancing with the Stars."

Nice post Neo-Con
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 02:57:12 PM
Now worries, Dax. I know links are hard to find. Me and you, we're still cool though.

Hey, if it's not on the Internet it doesn't exist.


Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 27, 2013, 03:20:44 PM
Yeah, only the real independent thinkers out there believe that the POTUS is sitting around at night, plotting ways to assassinate rogue journalists.

The POTUS was directly involved in picking out which families to kill with Drone Strikes.


Yep, all those poor, innocent families out there who were droned in the middle of the night, right after they got done watching "Dancing with the Stars."

Nice post Neo-Con


I'm sure the intent of each drone strike was to murder as many innocent families as possible.


 :rolleyes:
 
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 03:26:12 PM
Yeah, only the real independent thinkers out there believe that the POTUS is sitting around at night, plotting ways to assassinate rogue journalists.

The POTUS was directly involved in picking out which families to kill with Drone Strikes.


Yep, all those poor, innocent families out there who were droned in the middle of the night, right after they got done watching "Dancing with the Stars."

Nice post Neo-Con


I'm sure the intent of each drone strike was to murder as many innocent families as possible.


 :rolleyes:

It's hard to have this discussion with a neo-con, throw the lead and count the dead right Beems??

The definition of a Terrorist that was being used at one point, if not still by JSOC et. al. was extremely loose. 

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 27, 2013, 03:30:23 PM
Yeah, only the real independent thinkers out there believe that the POTUS is sitting around at night, plotting ways to assassinate rogue journalists.

The POTUS was directly involved in picking out which families to kill with Drone Strikes.


Yep, all those poor, innocent families out there who were droned in the middle of the night, right after they got done watching "Dancing with the Stars."

Nice post Neo-Con


I'm sure the intent of each drone strike was to murder as many innocent families as possible.


 :rolleyes:

It's hard to have this discussion with a neo-con, throw the lead and count the dead right Beems??

The definition of a Terrorist that was being used at one point, if not still by JSOC et. al. was extremely loose.


Could you at least stop pretending like these drone strikes are aimed at the homes of random, innocent families?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 03:35:15 PM
Yeah, only the real independent thinkers out there believe that the POTUS is sitting around at night, plotting ways to assassinate rogue journalists.

The POTUS was directly involved in picking out which families to kill with Drone Strikes.


Yep, all those poor, innocent families out there who were droned in the middle of the night, right after they got done watching "Dancing with the Stars."

Nice post Neo-Con


I'm sure the intent of each drone strike was to murder as many innocent families as possible.


 :rolleyes:

It's hard to have this discussion with a neo-con, throw the lead and count the dead right Beems??

The definition of a Terrorist that was being used at one point, if not still by JSOC et. al. was extremely loose.


Could you at least stop pretending like these drone strikes are aimed at the homes of random, innocent families?

The neo-con will always accept Coleteral Damage as he prosecutes his secret war.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 27, 2013, 04:00:23 PM
LOL at 'Pad calling me a neo-con when he most likely voted for George W. Bush twice.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 04:10:03 PM
LOL at 'Pad calling me a neo-con when he most likely voted for George W. Bush twice.

The only thing that seperates the current administration from the previous is the unilaterial or near unilaterial conventional force invasion of a soverign nation . . . in  nearly every other facet of what supposedly caused so called Progressive Liberals to hate the previous administration . . . has been expanded and accelerated under the current administration including the use of non-conventional asymetric warfare to topple the government of a soverign nation (backed by US/NATO cruise missile and F-15's, not to mention Western Intelligence capital assets and conventional military transportation mechanisms).    Patriot Act, FISA, state sanctioned assassanation etc. etc. and et. al . . . all expanded by the current administration.   This is what the closeted Liberal Neo-Con supports.   Encroachment on civil liberties . . . accelerated by the current administration.

Stay tuned on the conventional force/boots on the ground aspect that was mentioned in the previous paragraph as it pertains to Syria.   
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: CNS on June 27, 2013, 04:12:02 PM
Dax, you totally missed a fantastic opportunity to drop a "link?" and totally burn him.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 04:13:20 PM
Dax, you totally missed a fantastic opportunity to drop a "link?" and totally burn him.

If it's not on the Internet, no one thought it, saw it, or heard it.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on June 27, 2013, 04:18:07 PM
I don't have a link it's just general observation. 

You seem to be kind of upset about this though Felix.   Sorry bro

So your claim that progressives/left-leaners are relieved and/or working in unison to discredit Michael Hastings, his work, and activist journalism wholly with an end goal of protecting Obama from being linked to a car-assassination plot is all based on a "general observation"?

When you have an immediate, seemingly lockstep response from them MSM to discredit, pooh-pooh, and tamp down all thought and inquiry by non MSM types into the events that led to Hastings death, it's a reasonable response for any observer . . . 'a whew, I can jump on this and nip this in the bud right now and move on' mindset.

So a a progressive, liberal-leaning MSM working in lockstop to "pooh pooh" down inquiry and thought into Hastings death would certainly never do a piece on Hastings conspiracy theories - especially not one would actually hint that a conspiracy is possible because that would be to go against orders.

“Even at this make-shift memorial, there are questions about Hastings’ death,”

CNN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rHc5pzH-7M (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rHc5pzH-7M)

Megan Kelley at Fox News

“Some are asking if there is more to his death than meets the eye"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6O2fqsPPHM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6O2fqsPPHM)

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on June 27, 2013, 04:21:35 PM
Can't wait for the made up toxicology report w/ his ".20 BAC"
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on June 27, 2013, 04:43:30 PM
I don't have a link it's just general observation. 

You seem to be kind of upset about this though Felix.   Sorry bro

So your claim that progressives/left-leaners are relieved and/or working in unison to discredit Michael Hastings, his work, and activist journalism wholly with an end goal of protecting Obama from being linked to a car-assassination plot is all based on a "general observation"?

When you have an immediate, seemingly lockstep response from them MSM to discredit, pooh-pooh, and tamp down all thought and inquiry by non MSM types into the events that led to Hastings death, it's a reasonable response for any observer . . . 'a whew, I can jump on this and nip this in the bud right now and move on' mindset.

So a a progressive, liberal-leaning MSM working in lockstop to "pooh pooh" down inquiry and thought into Hastings death would certainly never do a piece on Hastings conspiracy theories - especially not one would actually hint that a conspiracy is possible because that would be to go against orders.

“Even at this make-shift memorial, there are questions about Hastings’ death,”

CNN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rHc5pzH-7M (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rHc5pzH-7M)

Megan Kelley at Fox News

“Some are asking if there is more to his death than meets the eye"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6O2fqsPPHM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6O2fqsPPHM)

FOX NEWS!?  :sdeek:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 27, 2013, 07:00:31 PM
I don't have a link it's just general observation. 

You seem to be kind of upset about this though Felix.   Sorry bro

So your claim that progressives/left-leaners are relieved and/or working in unison to discredit Michael Hastings, his work, and activist journalism wholly with an end goal of protecting Obama from being linked to a car-assassination plot is all based on a "general observation"?

When you have an immediate, seemingly lockstep response from them MSM to discredit, pooh-pooh, and tamp down all thought and inquiry by non MSM types into the events that led to Hastings death, it's a reasonable response for any observer . . . 'a whew, I can jump on this and nip this in the bud right now and move on' mindset.

So a a progressive, liberal-leaning MSM working in lockstop to "pooh pooh" down inquiry and thought into Hastings death would certainly never do a piece on Hastings conspiracy theories - especially not one would actually hint that a conspiracy is possible because that would be to go against orders.

“Even at this make-shift memorial, there are questions about Hastings’ death,”

CNN: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rHc5pzH-7M (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rHc5pzH-7M)

Megan Kelley at Fox News

“Some are asking if there is more to his death than meets the eye"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6O2fqsPPHM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6O2fqsPPHM)

The only thing I watch on CNN is Anthony Bourdain, and my combined weekly viewing of Fox News is about 5 minutes.


Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on June 27, 2013, 11:01:35 PM
Now worries, Dax. I know links are hard to find. Me and you, we're still cool though.

Hey, if it's not on the Internet it doesn't exist.

So basically you're asking me to just trust you on this one? To clarify, that's not a problem. I just wanted to be sure (you know how flaky we g-men are).
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kim carnes on June 27, 2013, 11:05:10 PM
Now worries, Dax. I know links are hard to find. Me and you, we're still cool though.

Hey, if it's not on the Internet it doesn't exist.

So basically you're asking me to just trust you on this one? To clarify, that's not a problem. I just wanted to be sure (you know how flaky we g-men are).

so his car just exploded?  ok...
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on June 28, 2013, 04:54:42 AM
Now worries, Dax. I know links are hard to find. Me and you, we're still cool though.

Hey, if it's not on the Internet it doesn't exist.

So basically you're asking me to just trust you on this one? To clarify, that's not a problem. I just wanted to be sure (you know how flaky we g-men are).

Perfect, well that's settled then.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: OregonSmock on June 28, 2013, 10:50:12 AM
Now worries, Dax. I know links are hard to find. Me and you, we're still cool though.

Hey, if it's not on the Internet it doesn't exist.

So basically you're asking me to just trust you on this one? To clarify, that's not a problem. I just wanted to be sure (you know how flaky we g-men are).

so his car just exploded?  ok...



So that means that the POTUS was behind it?  Makes sense?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on July 26, 2013, 06:47:22 PM
http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/07/michael_hastings_crash_video.php (http://blogs.laweekly.com/informer/2013/07/michael_hastings_crash_video.php)
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on July 26, 2013, 07:04:54 PM
No doubt in my mind that his car was hacked

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oqe6S6m73Zw (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=oqe6S6m73Zw)
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on July 28, 2013, 05:35:15 PM
explosive video
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on August 14, 2013, 09:17:17 PM
Journalist Michael Hastings was investigating CIA director John Brennan before his untimely death in a suspicious car accident it has been revealed, with the report set to be published posthumously by Rolling Stone Magazine within the next two weeks. - infowars.com

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xoyy2BCkhRE

Pretty interesting if true. Cant wait to see what happens!!!!!!!!!! :excited: :excited:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on August 15, 2013, 09:27:26 AM
Oh man, I can't wait to read that
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on August 15, 2013, 10:54:01 AM
LOL, the intro to that video was great
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kstatefreak42 on August 15, 2013, 05:57:56 PM
LOL, the intro to that video was great
What are your thoughts about Hastings investigating John Brennan?
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 15, 2013, 06:16:01 PM
seems legit
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on August 15, 2013, 07:04:21 PM
LOL, the intro to that video was great
What are your thoughts about Hastings investigating John Brennan?

Agree w/ steve dave, seems entirely possible.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on August 15, 2013, 07:36:19 PM
IMO, the interview is photoshopped.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Paul Moscow on August 21, 2013, 06:12:32 PM
Best read I've come across so far, http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/ (http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/)
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on August 22, 2013, 12:28:28 AM
Best read I've come across so far, http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/ (http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/)

Quote
One night in June, he came to Thigpen's apartment after midnight and urgently asked to borrow her Volvo. He said he was afraid to drive his own car. She declined, telling him her car was having mechanical problems.

Lady's got good instincts, gotta give her that.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Brock Landers on August 22, 2013, 09:09:16 AM
Best read I've come across so far, http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/ (http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/)

Quote
One night in June, he came to Thigpen's apartment after midnight and urgently asked to borrow her Volvo. He said he was afraid to drive his own car. She declined, telling him her car was having mechanical problems.

Lady's got good instincts, gotta give her that.


Hastings might still be alive if that bitch hadn't lied to him.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on August 22, 2013, 09:36:17 AM
Best read I've come across so far, http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/ (http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/)

Quote
One night in June, he came to Thigpen's apartment after midnight and urgently asked to borrow her Volvo. He said he was afraid to drive his own car. She declined, telling him her car was having mechanical problems.

Lady's got good instincts, gotta give her that.


Hastings might still be alive if that bitch hadn't lied to him.

Oh. Sure. the NSA/CSI didn't know about his midnight booty call. They just would have remote controlled drone hacked her car instead. And I haven't seen ANY EVIDENCE that the CIAs weren't responsible for her "mechanical problems" thereby leaving him no option but his own car.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Brock Landers on August 22, 2013, 09:43:10 AM
Best read I've come across so far, http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/ (http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/)

Quote
One night in June, he came to Thigpen's apartment after midnight and urgently asked to borrow her Volvo. He said he was afraid to drive his own car. She declined, telling him her car was having mechanical problems.

Lady's got good instincts, gotta give her that.


Hastings might still be alive if that bitch hadn't lied to him.

Oh. Sure. the NSA/CSI didn't know about his midnight booty call. They just would have remote controlled drone hacked her car instead. And I haven't seen ANY EVIDENCE that the CIAs weren't responsible for her "mechanical problems" thereby leaving him no option but his own car.


But Volvos are supposed to be really safe vehicles tho.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: CNS on August 22, 2013, 09:48:19 AM
Sounds pretty obvs that she is the CIA and is pretty good at auto "accidents"
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 23, 2013, 10:22:54 AM
The latest incident with Greenwald and his partner is just further evidence that journalists are being targeted.    The CIA and MI-6 are up to a lot of no good, supporting entities that we're suppossed to be at war with and using those entities to overthrow secular/relatively stable governments to accomplish???    :dunno:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 23, 2013, 10:54:06 AM
The latest incident with Greenwald and his partner is just further evidence that journalists are being targeted.    The CIA and MI-6 are up to a lot of no good, supporting entities that we're suppossed to be at war with and using those entities to overthrow secular/relatively stable governments to accomplish???    :dunno:

I agree with this, but I really don't believe that those agencies had anything to do with the death of Michael Hastings.

The CIA wants more surveillance power and a permanent state of war gives them an excuse for grabbing it.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on August 23, 2013, 12:31:52 PM
THEY'RE ONTO US! :runaway: :runaway:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 23, 2013, 02:23:29 PM
I don't get why you think this is so funny Felix.

Why are you so far in the tank for activities that the vast majority of liberals would be having a $hit fit about if a Republican administration was in office and conducting them?

It's pretty obvious that the (for example) the CIA was engaged in running weapons out of Libya into Syria.   When are we going to learn our lesson that putting weapons in the hands of hardcore Islamic Fundamentalist in order to overthrow governments (or thwarting a rival super power) really isn't a good idea??

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on August 23, 2013, 02:30:00 PM
Wait, do you think I'm a liberal? Well how about that.  :eye:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on August 23, 2013, 04:30:15 PM
Best read I've come across so far, http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/ (http://www.laweekly.com/2013-08-22/news/michael-hastings-crash/)

I finally read this, and it was really interesting. But that one journalist saying everyone was crazy that the government was doing this while pretty much agreeing that illegal surveillance happened to Hastings wasn't exactly the strongest evidence.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on August 23, 2013, 04:31:49 PM
It's pretty obvious, krusty.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 23, 2013, 05:49:23 PM
I never thought the administratin of Hope and Change could take us to a point where we'd be having these kinds of discussions.

Sad
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 05:55:44 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on August 23, 2013, 05:56:49 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?

Not possible. Barry couldn't have possibly known right? I mean, after all, He is the King of Hope, Change, Transparecy, and Forward.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 05:59:10 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?

Not possible. Barry couldn't have possibly known right? I mean, after all, He is the King of Hope, Change, Transparecy, and Forward.

I've noticed this is kind of how extremists on here post. it's a very ignorant way to post fwiw.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on August 23, 2013, 06:01:51 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?

Not possible. Barry couldn't have possibly known right? I mean, after all, He is the King of Hope, Change, Transparecy, and Forward.

I've noticed this is kind of how extremists on here post. it's a very ignorant way to post fwiw.

I'm the most moderate poster in the Pit, Steve.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on August 23, 2013, 06:27:08 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?

I don't think Barry gave the order but I do believe people in the government wanted him dead due to his investigative reporting and made it happen.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on August 23, 2013, 06:28:34 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?

I don't think Barry gave the order but I do believe people in the government wanted him dead due to his investigative reporting and made it happen.

extremist!
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 06:29:17 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?

I don't think Barry gave the order but I do believe people in the government wanted him dead due to his investigative reporting and made it happen.

you think Barry knew about it though? good response btw.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 06:30:06 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?

I don't think Barry gave the order but I do believe people in the government wanted him dead due to his investigative reporting and made it happen.

extremist!

oh look, pike posting like a coward again.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: EllRobersonisInnocent on August 23, 2013, 06:30:34 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?

I don't think Barry gave the order but I do believe people in the government wanted him dead due to his investigative reporting and made it happen.

you think Barry knew about it though? good response btw.

I'd say probably not, tbh
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 06:32:48 PM
you think Barry smoked him Dax?

I don't think Barry gave the order but I do believe people in the government wanted him dead due to his investigative reporting and made it happen.

you think Barry knew about it though? good response btw.

I'd say probably not, tbh

yeah, if someone from the gov. smoked him I'm also guessing he didn't know about it
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on August 23, 2013, 06:37:48 PM
Barry doesn't know about anything. He's all powerful and Hope and Changy yet he doesn't know crap going on in his own admin. Forward
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sonofdaxjones on August 23, 2013, 06:54:42 PM
My point was that we are discussing quite possibly the most aggressive muzzling (that's putting it very nicely) of the press in modern U.S. history.

During the administration of Hope and Change and various other outright lies.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 06:55:40 PM
yeah, that's what I figured. a lot of people here like to hint around at things like that but when confronted are too cowardly to say that's what they believe or that's what they are hinting at. but another hope and change reference!
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: star seed 7 on August 23, 2013, 07:37:22 PM
You just don't "get it", sd.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on August 23, 2013, 08:12:25 PM
Barry would never muzzle the press. And even if he did, he didn't know about it.
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 08:26:03 PM

Barry would never muzzle the press. And even if he did, he didn't know about it.

That's our pike!
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on August 23, 2013, 08:26:12 PM
After reading that article, I think he was paranoid/drunk/high.

BUT...we absolutely need to blow up the NSA and drastically change the way they operate or something. It hasn't been talked about much here for some reason...(maybe because the resident Neocons support their work?)...but what they are doing is atrocious.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 08:29:06 PM
we absolutely need to blow up the NSA and drastically change the way they operate or something. It hasn't been talked about much here for some reason...(maybe because the resident Neocons support their work?)...but what they are doing is atrocious.

absolutely
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on August 23, 2013, 08:41:27 PM
we absolutely need to blow up the NSA and drastically change the way they operate or something. It hasn't been talked about much here for some reason...(maybe because the resident Neocons support their work?)...but what they are doing is atrocious.

absolutely

lol wut? The resident Libtards are the ones cheerleading Barry to each milestone of civil liberty destruction every day and at the same time giving him a free pass because "he didn't know"
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 23, 2013, 09:16:55 PM
Yeah, I've probably made about a thousand "Nazi" and "police state" accusations
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: mortons toe on August 23, 2013, 09:38:42 PM
After reading that article, I think he was paranoid/drunk/high.

BUT...we absolutely need to blow up the NSA and drastically change the way they operate or something. It hasn't been talked about much here for some reason...(maybe because the resident Neocons support their work?)...but what they are doing is atrocious.

troll score: 2/10
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 09:42:09 PM
you think the jews smoked his ass mort?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 23, 2013, 10:01:57 PM
republicans are correct that the democrats are hypocritical. when a republican is in office the dems lose their crap over illegal detentions/waterboarding/drones/waging wars of aggression/wars fought for oil/gay rights/etc. by contrast, if a democrat is in office the dems all sit on their hands when civil liberties are threatened.

i say that so that i can make a bigger point. republicans(conservatives) care relatively little about civil liberties, including the freedom of the press and the fourth amendment stuff brought up by the NSA. when a conservative is in office they preach fear of terrorism. when a "liberal" is in office they preach dem hypocrisy. if this isn't true, then why are conservatives so ineffective at raising hell about civil liberties infractions? all they can muster is attempts to mock liberals for not achieving the ideals they espouse.

Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 23, 2013, 10:02:20 PM
you think the jews smoked his ass mort?

Troll Score: epic fail
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 23, 2013, 10:07:03 PM
republicans are correct that the democrats are hypocritical. when a republican is in office the dems lose their crap over illegal detentions/waterboarding/drones/waging wars of aggression/wars fought for oil/gay rights/etc. by contrast, if a democrat is in office the dems all sit on their hands when civil liberties are threatened.

i say that so that i can make a bigger point. republicans(conservatives) care relatively little about civil liberties, including the freedom of the press and the fourth amendment stuff brought up by the NSA. when a conservative is in office they preach fear of terrorism. when a "liberal" is in office they preach dem hypocrisy. if this isn't true, then why are conservatives so ineffective at raising hell about civil liberties infractions? all they can muster is attempts to mock liberals for not achieving the ideals they espouse.

great post
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 23, 2013, 11:22:22 PM
republicans are correct that the democrats are hypocritical. when a republican is in office the dems lose their crap over illegal detentions/waterboarding/drones/waging wars of aggression/wars fought for oil/gay rights/etc. by contrast, if a democrat is in office the dems all sit on their hands when civil liberties are threatened.

i say that so that i can make a bigger point. republicans(conservatives) care relatively little about civil liberties, including the freedom of the press and the fourth amendment stuff brought up by the NSA. when a conservative is in office they preach fear of terrorism. when a "liberal" is in office they preach dem hypocrisy. if this isn't true, then why are conservatives so ineffective at raising hell about civil liberties infractions? all they can muster is attempts to mock liberals for not achieving the ideals they espouse.

Pit Alert! The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sys on August 24, 2013, 12:41:01 AM
The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on August 24, 2013, 03:28:12 AM
I like you too, sys.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Kat Kid on August 24, 2013, 08:35:20 AM
The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.

I agree, but I think the critique of thinking conservatives goes more like this: No one doubts the credentials of people taking the Foreign Service Exam/European diplomats etc., what is in doubt is their attachment to reality and their efficacy at creating top-down solutions and one-size-fits-all fixes. 

Obviously at the macro level both "local" policies and "national/federal" policies are romanticized by these opposing political factions and thus most of the speech about them is really partisan tactical talking points that is nearly meaningless at a ideological level and really mostly about enforcing "in-group/out-group" tribalism.   
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 24, 2013, 10:15:35 AM
whoa, this is some good high level goEMAW political discussion  :surprised:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 24, 2013, 10:57:58 AM
There's nothing more MSNBC than a bunch of pseudo intellectual libtards, wholove nothing more than hearing themselves talk, trying to get into the psyche of a conservative.

 :flush:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 24, 2013, 11:36:31 AM
kick their asses FSD!
Title: Re: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on August 24, 2013, 11:40:17 AM
There's nothing more MSNBC than a bunch of pseudo intellectual libtards, wholove nothing more than hearing themselves talk, trying to get into the psyche of a conservative.

 :flush:

this wasn't the most fsd post, but it was close.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: CNS on August 24, 2013, 11:53:09 AM
Thought it was a rather standard FSD post. 
Title: Re: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on August 24, 2013, 12:11:57 PM
Thought it was a rather standard FSD post.

 The post had the general effect he was looking for, but I'm sure he wishes he could do better.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 24, 2013, 12:17:12 PM
The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.

Problems with rogue employees at the local level can generally be fixed, not so much at the federal level. Lots of proof recently.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 24, 2013, 12:23:42 PM
The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.

this post doesn't sound like typical sys, it doesn't seem very smart.
Title: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: steve dave on August 24, 2013, 12:25:49 PM

The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.

Problems with rogue employees at the local level can generally be fixed, not so much at the federal level. Lots of proof recently.

rogue employees at the local level don't generally effect (affect?) anything outside of the local level either
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sys on August 24, 2013, 12:39:15 PM
Problems with rogue employees at the local level can generally be fixed, not so much at the federal level. Lots of proof recently.

that's a good point.  it's maybe more about power than competence (although, i think generally state and local government have more impact on one's life, excluding taxation).  in a similar vein, i was also thinking that it might be because people feel they can move if they don't like local or state policies and practices, but don't feel similarly capable of escaping interactions with the federal government.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: felix rex on August 24, 2013, 01:34:25 PM
The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.

I agree, but I think the critique of thinking conservatives goes more like this: No one doubts the credentials of people taking the Foreign Service Exam/European diplomats etc., what is in doubt is their attachment to reality and their efficacy at creating top-down solutions and one-size-fits-all fixes. 

Obviously at the macro level both "local" policies and "national/federal" policies are romanticized by these opposing political factions and thus most of the speech about them is really partisan tactical talking points that is nearly meaningless at a ideological level and really mostly about enforcing "in-group/out-group" tribalism.   

According to my European diplomat friend, another big problem is that different parts of the federal government have different, sometimes conflicting, objectives. So you have a situation where the faces of the federal government are saying one thing as part of a messaging effort pushed by one part, where employees in a different building are convinced, incentivized and/or pressured to pursue a different, potentially conflicting objective. Often, both objectives are defensible and reasonable, but it can create an aura of dissimulation that easily seeps into one's actual perspective. In part, it's a result of the compartmentalization of information and duties heavily enacted in the last decade (in that European guy's view), leading to a fragmented and stovepiped "centralized" government where the left hand is knowingly at odds with what the right hand is doing.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kim carnes on August 24, 2013, 08:19:13 PM
The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.

Problems with rogue employees at the local level can generally be fixed, not so much at the federal level. Lots of proof recently.

no
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 25, 2013, 12:37:08 AM
The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.

Problems with rogue employees at the local level can generally be fixed, not so much at the federal level. Lots of proof recently.

no

yes
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 25, 2013, 12:55:11 AM
The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.

Problems with rogue employees at the local level can generally be fixed, not so much at the federal level. Lots of proof recently.

no

yes

wtf is a rogue employee?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 25, 2013, 01:12:38 AM
The federal government no longer cares about your civil liberties!

i think it's interesting that the normal brand of right-leaning person typically qualifies an expression of fear/dislike of government with federal.  maybe it's partly ideological (but really, i think, much more empirical), but in my interactions with government, i've almost invariably found the federal level to be more rational, efficient and restrained than state and local levels.  even more so, i've found federal employees to be generally intelligent, competent, pleasant and somewhat idealistic.  excluding public university employees, i would not say the same of state and local employees as groups.

Problems with rogue employees at the local level can generally be fixed, not so much at the federal level. Lots of proof recently.

no

yes

wtf is a rogue employee?

http://www.merriam-webster.com
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 25, 2013, 01:18:33 AM
how do you fix rogue employees at the state level and why is it harder to do so at the federal level?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on August 25, 2013, 03:03:01 AM
how do you fix rogue employees at the state level and why is it harder to do so at the federal level?

because the Libtards give everyone in the Federal Government a free pass. Doesn't matter who you spied on or who you killed. Hope, Change, Forward
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: chum1 on August 25, 2013, 08:34:59 AM
I'd love to see some examples of rogue employees in order to better understand this national crisis we have on our hands. 
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: chunkles on August 25, 2013, 09:58:09 AM
Wait, do you think I'm a liberal? Well how about that.  :eye:

 :lol: read through this thread just waiting for this to happen... again.
you need a stat sheet of accusations, fr.  I'm guessing right now the ratio is about 3:1 [libtard obamabot : #teamteabaggery], which will flip once another party wins the white house.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 25, 2013, 10:21:25 AM
Well this thread has taken an odd turn, speculating upon a false premise.

Even though most rudimentary understanding of federalism would lead even the most obtuse observer to the correct conslusion as to the cynisism towards federal government; nevermind the obvious intent of the Constitution to limit its power.  Perhaps if the Federal govt didn't confiscate approx 1/3 of a States income to pursue endeavors that may have little to no benefit to the state itself, without proper recourse, people wouldn't be so critical :notsure:

Anyways, a more appropriate question is why the left has such a naive and altruistic view of the federal government, to the point of willing to ignore it overstepping its jurisdictional boundaries.  If they want to reconstitute the government to award the Fed police powers why don't they try and do it?  Why do they prefer to instead pass legislation they hope either goes unchallenged or is too politically unpopular to challenge?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: 8manpick on August 25, 2013, 11:15:12 AM
We have the internet and planes and stuff instead of guys on horses delivering mail... Why do we even need state governments anymore?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 25, 2013, 11:29:44 AM
We have the internet and planes and stuff instead of guys on horses delivering mail... Why do we even need state governments anymore?

 :sdeek:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: star seed 7 on August 25, 2013, 12:25:41 PM
State government does seem pretty antiquated.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: 8manpick on August 25, 2013, 12:32:18 PM
State government does seem pretty antiquated.

I mean, what is this, 1913 or 2013?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on August 25, 2013, 12:47:35 PM
State government does seem pretty antiquated.

It would be much better if we redrew state lines in a way that made sense.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: sys on August 25, 2013, 01:37:10 PM
State government does seem pretty antiquated.

It would be much better if we redrew state lines in a way that made sense.

what would make sense?  does semi-arbitrary make sense, or using physiographic features, or does aligning borders with some sort of demographic or economic commonalities make sense?  i'd think that the latter would tend to engender more conflict rather than less.

for that matter does 5000 make sense?  or 500 or 50, or 5?  i guess i don't see any unifying border drawing principles that are clearly preferable or more logical than others.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 25, 2013, 01:56:20 PM
We have the internet and planes and stuff instead of guys on horses delivering mail... Why do we even need state governments anymore?

I thought about taking bubbles post re Partisan Police State grievances (the post that was so great per libtard Dave and set off this "serious" discussion) and FYP for this rediculous troll, but thought it to be a waste of time.  The leftists on this board are so intellectually dishonest (as evidenced by the libtard posts since) and close minded that it's really not worth pointing out anymore.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: 8manpick on August 25, 2013, 02:02:02 PM
We have the internet and planes and stuff instead of guys on horses delivering mail... Why do we even need state governments anymore?

I thought about taking bubbles post re Partisan Police State grievances (the post that was so great per libtard Dave and set off this "serious" discussion) and FYP for this rediculous troll, but thought it to be a waste of time.  The leftists on this board are so intellectually dishonest (as evidenced by the libtard posts since) and close minded that it's really not worth pointing out anymore.

Not a leftist, but criticism noted. Will make sure to take the pit more seriously in future discussions.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: star seed 7 on August 25, 2013, 02:38:11 PM
Why do neocons call liberals "statists" when neocons are the ones in love with state government?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: john "teach me how to" dougie on August 25, 2013, 02:56:35 PM
Why do neocons call liberals "statists" when neocons are the ones in love with state government?

 :lol:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: mortons toe on August 25, 2013, 04:35:59 PM
jfc, I mean seriously... either the last couple of pages have been the best troll attempts by couple of you guys, or you are just mind-blowingly stupid.

Seven... If you don't know what the term "satanist" means in the context that most use it in, you just need to retire from political dialogue. I'll attempt to help you out... a "satanist" is commonly referred to as someone who believes in centrally planned government... ie, one massive cluster-fuq.

Michcat... I'm going to add to sys' comment about 5000, 50, 5 with an analogy stemming from another subject, minimum wage. What does make sense?... $10/hr, $50/hr, or how about $500/hr. Unfortunately, you won't be able to see the connection.

8man... ask many Europeans about their thoughts on bailing out other countries with their tax dollars. But again, unfortunately, you too will probably not be able to make the connection. 
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on August 25, 2013, 04:39:11 PM
State government does seem pretty antiquated.

It would be much better if we redrew state lines in a way that made sense.

what would make sense?  does semi-arbitrary make sense, or using physiographic features, or does aligning borders with some sort of demographic or economic commonalities make sense?  i'd think that the latter would tend to engender more conflict rather than less.

for that matter does 5000 make sense?  or 500 or 50, or 5?  i guess i don't see any unifying border drawing principles that are clearly preferable or more logical than others.

Those are good questions. I think it is healthy to have some level of government between federal and municipal levels. I would propose grouping areas of somewhat similar economic demographics of approximately the same population (10-20 million so you can make most metros in their own state?) it would make far more sense than what we have now.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: chum1 on August 25, 2013, 04:47:03 PM
Jeez, mortons toe sounds a little pissed.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: michigancat on August 25, 2013, 04:51:03 PM
jfc, I mean seriously... either the last couple of pages have been the best troll attempts by couple of you guys, or you are just mind-blowingly stupid.

Seven... If you don't know what the term "satanist" means in the context that most use it in, you just need to retire from political dialogue. I'll attempt to help you out... a "satanist" is commonly referred to as someone who believes in centrally planned government... ie, one massive cluster-fuq.

Michcat... I'm going to add to sys' comment about 5000, 50, 5 with an analogy stemming from another subject, minimum wage. What does make sense?... $10/hr, $50/hr, or how about $500/hr. Unfortunately, you won't be able to see the connection.

8man... ask many Europeans about their thoughts on bailing out other countries with their tax dollars. But again, unfortunately, you too will probably not be able to make the connection.

I don't think that's a very good analogy at all. I think raising the minimum wage is largely ineffective at whatever it intends to do. 
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: 8manpick on August 25, 2013, 05:05:13 PM
8man... ask many Europeans about their thoughts on bailing out other countries with their tax dollars. But again, unfortunately, you too will probably not be able to make the connection.

:sdeek: I don't want to bail out European countries at all. That wouldn't make much sense for American states to do.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on August 25, 2013, 05:09:53 PM
Toe was right, they can't make the connection. Woof
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: chum1 on August 25, 2013, 05:20:49 PM
Toe was right, they can't make the connection. Woof

Are they that dumb or are you two that smart?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: 8manpick on August 25, 2013, 05:40:00 PM
Toe was right, they can't make the connection. Woof

Are they that dumb or are you two that smart?

Yes. Bark.
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: bubbles4ksu on August 25, 2013, 06:02:03 PM
merge states according to the court of appeals map. it would be allow us to bring in the marianas, guam and puerto rico. the 11 states of america!
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: star seed 7 on August 25, 2013, 06:14:36 PM
Why do neocons call liberals "statists" when neocons are the ones in love with state government?

 :lol:

 :peek:
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: 8manpick on August 25, 2013, 06:15:26 PM
merge states according to the court of appeals map. it would be allow us to bring in the marianas, guam and puerto rico. the 11 states of america!

Flag idea! (https://goemaw.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fthumb%2Ff%2Ffb%2FCSA_Flag_2.7.1861-28.11.1861.svg%2F800px-CSA_Flag_2.7.1861-28.11.1861.svg.png&hash=96b67cee9d56ff31d7e7bb4cdaf15298df3cd4fd)
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: kim carnes on August 25, 2013, 08:45:18 PM
Why do neocons call liberals "statists" when neocons are the ones in love with state government?

do you know what a neocon is?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: star seed 7 on August 25, 2013, 08:57:33 PM
Why do neocons call liberals "statists" when neocons are the ones in love with state government?

do you know what a neocon is?

A dumb, angry, racist redneck?
Title: Re: Sorry Michael Hastings . . .
Post by: p1k3 on August 25, 2013, 09:08:23 PM
Why do neocons call liberals "statists" when neocons are the ones in love with state government?

do you know what a neocon is?

A dumb, angry, racist redneck?

Correct. Barry O fits the description well, fwiw