If the face is true evil, mine is beyond redemption. It is a shame that we judge people by how they look, the prettier or more handsome given the edge. No one should equate faces with intellect or what they can contribute.

Canada remembers when the Conservative Party paid dearly at the polls for attack ads mocking the Liberal prime minister with turned down corner of his mouth from a childhood affliction. Low blow.

One should expect King to know the face of true evil...

I don't have a clue who it is.

Words of wisdom. It's a face only a true believer could love.

Missing the point of James' post perhaps?

George Soros a billionaire who is vehemently anti gun.

Joe, I don't know the face either. At first glimpse thought it Buckley in decline but not likely to be posted here. I admired Buckley.

Dave, that gave me the idea there must be some tiny bit of redeeming to any person, including Soros, "the face of true evil." I looked at the conservative Koch brothers. Sure enough, they play both sides, saying one thing and doing another. From Huffington Post:

"WASHINGTON -- Despite their stated support for both personal and economic libertarianism, billionaires Charles and David Koch are sending funds through their dark money political network to support a "get out the vote" drive by evangelical Christians who oppose abortion rights and are furious at recent court rulings that allow gay marriage.

Over the past month, Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce, the central hub of the Kochs' dark money enterprise, contributed $885,000 to CitizenLink, a social welfare nonprofit focused on election engagement. The group was launched by Focus on the Family -- an evangelical Christian group that opposes abortion and gay marriage -- and was previously known as Focus on the Family Action.

The contributions to CitizenLink are being used in a "get out the vote" effort to help elect Republicans who share their opposition to same-sex marriage and abortion rights.


On Wednesday, CitizenLink reported spending almost $250,000 on direct mail to support Republican Senate candidates Bill Cassidy in Louisiana, Tom Cotton in Arkansas, Joni Ernst in Iowa, Cory Gardner in Colorado, Pat Roberts in Kansas, Dan Sullivan in Alaska and Thom Tillis in North Carolina. All of these candidates support banning or severely restricting abortion and oppose recent court decisions that struck down bans on same-sex marriage.

However, the Koch brothers appear to have different views on those issues.

"I believe in gay marriage," David Koch told Politico in a 2012 interview.

Daniel Schulman, a senior editor at Mother Jones and author of Sons of Wichita: How the Koch Brothers Became America's Most Powerful and Private Dynasty, writes that David Koch supports not only gay marriage but also abortion rights. Running as the Libertarian Party vice presidential candidate in 1980, David Koch backed a platform calling for the full legalization of abortion.

Charles Koch has been more tight-lipped on the policies pursued by Christian conservatives. As Schulman points out, however, he scoffed at the separation of economic libertarianism from personal libertarianism in a 1978 writing.

"What a spectacle it is for the same people who preach freedom in voluntary economic activities to call for the full force of the law against voluntary sexual or other personal activities!" Charles Koch wrote.

The Kochs' funding of groups doing work they supposedly oppose is not new.

Since 2010, the political nonprofit network operated by the Koch brothers has funnelled nearly $24 million to evangelical Christian and conservative Catholic groups that support legislating traditional religious morality and strongly oppose gay marriage and abortion, according to tax returns filed by Koch-run nonprofits and collected by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Including the recently disclosed contributions, CitizenLink has received almost $10 million of these contributions. Concerned Women for America, a large anti-abortion group, received $11.4 million from the Koch network since 2010. Another anti-abortion group, Susan B. Anthony List, received more than $1.5 million over the same time period.

Charles Koch has said those who would like to shrink government, cut taxes and eliminate regulations need to fund social conservative organizations, even if they support using the force of government to restrict personal freedoms."

Are they devils or saints or both? Is it more ethical to be Soros, the devilish, alleged face of true evil?

http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials...republicans.htm

By almost every measure, in fact, it's the Democrats, not the Republicans, who are the party of the rich.

Start with Congress itself. Who are the wealthiest members? Well, there are 269 millionaires among Congress' 535 members. And most of them are Democrats.

And contrary to the hand-wringing on the left about the Supreme Court's 5-4 McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission ruling Wednesday, Democrats far outspend Republicans on elections. It isn't even close.

According to OpenSecrets.org, from 1989 to 2014 rich donors gave Democrats $1.15 billion — $416 million more than the $736 million given to the GOP. Among the top 10 donors to both parties, Democrat supporters outspent Republican supporters 2-to-1.

But what about the villainous Koch brothers, those conservative plutocrats supposedly seeking to control American politics? They rank 59th on the list of big givers — behind 18 unions and No. 1 Act Blue, the massive left-wing fund raiser that gives only to Democrats.

Yes that's right Dave he bankrolled the left wing terrorists organizations who took advantage of the situation in Ferguson.
As far as I'm concerned he's now a terrorist himself and it's open season on them.

Thanks for those figures, Dave. So Democrat congressman are richer than GOP across the aisle, and Democratic rich come with more dollars to the aid of their party. They make more and give more. I wonder why.

There's nothing villainous of Koch or anyone giving to both sides of issues or the political system. It's what businessmen do. They say it keeps the democratic system balanced, and it's also a license to do business without fearing the outcome of elections.

I don't know what's democratic about having gaggles of millionaires representing our interests. Canada had the most democratic House of Commons in living memory when no one gave conservative John Diefenbaker, a prairie populist and respected criminal lawyer, a hope of winning an election.

Few wanted to run for the party, the usual lawyers wouldn't come near it, and the result of his winning the federal election was the biggest raft of commoners ever in the House of Commons. I covered the election and Diefenbaker in and out of office for years. Strong believer in human rights.

PS---I remember one time party people got the wrong music for his tumultuous entrance to an Ontario meeting: the hymn "Amazing Grace." It was sung at a funeral I attended yesterday.

Leave it to the King to pretend not to recognize the biggest socialist in the world, George Soros.....that leaves an opportunity to defend a fellow socialist.
George Soros: socialist, biggest donor to extreme far left organizations and extreme far left Democratic politicians, meddles in the economy of countries in order to profit from it, vehemently anti-gun, anti-second amendment elitist, primarily responsible(through his anti-gun pit bull Rebecca Peters)for England and Australia's ridiculous gun laws, and probably the biggest danger to freedom in any country he pours money into.
But, what do you expect from someone who, as a teenager, aided the Nazis in exposing and rounding up Jews? Soros is Jewish, but was allowed to keep the possessions of any Jewish people he turned in to the Nazis. That he was not considered a war criminal was probably due to his age and that the facts did not come out until many years later when he admitted to his actions. Too bad the Mossad don't have him on their hit list.

Thanks Gary for the elaboration:
He is one guy that IMO should be shot on sight. A thoroughly disgusting individual on several levels.
I for one am still surprised the Israelis haven't sent out a hit squad after him.
Brown is on my ignore list so I have no idea what he has said specifically but I'll bet it's the usual B. S we've come to expect from him.
Jim

I disagree.

Gary, I didn't have the slightest idea of whose face. Socialism is as common as rain throughout the world, practised widely in most countries including the US, recognized as a legal party with members in the tens of millions.

Right now I'm more concerned about the position of members who advocate that Soros be shot on sight, particularly in a country with world attention from gun violence and history of assassinations.

If I were to post a message calling for the killing of anyone, most particularly on an international site such as this one, I'd expect a visit from a Mountie within a day. Making targets of socialists is the same as jihadists targeting Christians.

It would be a service to Jim to pass it along. And a caution to our moderator.

Who thought a Socialist wouldn't ?

I guess you didn't have a chance to read the entire resume that Gary took the time to pass along. Run of the mill, eh. Wouldn't it make a little sense to be concerned about your own position. If not, take a minute, I'm interested, what makes the face of evil so acceptable to you.

King,
I have to throw the BS flag on that comment. For someone who is well educated, well read and involved in local , national and international politics and issues. to say you don't recognize George Soros is a tough one to swallow.
The same George Soros who funds Moveon.org, the Tides Foundation,
For Soros, whose net worth is $20 billion according to Forbes

From the UK Telegraph:
Hungarian-born Soros, who established one of the first hedge funds in 1969 and is probably best known for famously betting against the British pound in 1992. That little currency fiasco that almost destroyed the British monetary system and their economy.
http://www.businessinsider.com/how-georg...-forever-2010-6

Just a swell guy, a vanguard for the down trodden, purely altruistic motivation.

A man of your claimed intelligence does not recognize or know who George Soros is? Give..me..a..break, King.
Being on the Mossad hit list also means you are brought in to stand trial for war crimes against the Jewish people. I don't see in my post where I advocated the killing of anyone. As far as a mountie, Texas Ranger, or federal law officer showing up at my door, that's the difference between Canada and here. Radical groups in the U.S. have regularly called for the killing of police and radical leftists have advocated the killing of conservatives..do you have an opinion on that? PETA members sent death threats to me for trapping feral cats, but none of those spineless psychos had law enforcement drop by to talk about it, even though I reported it.
Nice try on inferring Dave should get involved in this post; that's a typical liberal attempt to stifle any opinion contrary to yours.
I will give you credit for one thought...socialism has been widely practiced in many countries, but you conveniently (in the liberal style) left out the fact it has been an abject failure in every country that instilled it. Just ask any Russian, Cuban, Venezuelan, etc.
Answer this question: if America has so many faults, is so unjust, has so much inequality of wealth, is so racist and unfair, why are the liberal socialists(like you)so eager for everyone in the world to be granted free entry and citizenship to this socially backward country?
For the votes; so the dem/lib/socialists can stay elected and retain power. It's why Soros and socialists like him pour so much money into countries under the guise of "progressive". It is also why Soros is the main force behind the UN Small Arms Trade Treaty and has been since Bush the younger's first term in office. He finally managed to finance a president who would sign it, and made some 18 visits to the White House before the most transparent administration in history stopped releasing the WH log of visitors. If Soros is that adamant about the UN treaty, he has a plan for making money or achieving power or influence from it.
Slavery isn't dead; the socialists just try to sell it in a dressed up package called "progress".

As I said in earlier post, I thought it could be William F. Buckley Jr. George Soros I know as well as any other person interested in what's he's doing but I think the last I saw of his face was a sketch in the New York Review of Books. It bore no resemblance to The Face of True Evil posted here.

I am not an apologist for anything he's done. Making a billion on a British treasury mistake is small change, however, compared to what New York financiers did to America and overseas in the deepest recession of which the world is barely in half-recovery, and Big Oil threatening another with the world awash in oil.

As for altruism---always a suspect word for me---he is said to have contributed $7 billion to education, health and other "progressive" causes. Conservative philanthropists are generous with their money as well. Neither should be ridiculed for their actions, and it abhorrent to me that members incite to killing on sight another American for doing "disgusting" things.

Jeez, I guess jOe and I are libtards along with King, because I didn't recognize Soros from just the pic and neither did jOe.

No, Gary, Mossad works within and outside the law as circumstances warrant, as the US with attempted assassination of Castro, Russia against defectors in London, Canada's "wet ops" on New York streets against Nazi spies long before the US got into the war. It's a jungle, due process and protocol goes by the board everywhere.

My "nice try" with our moderator is a responsibility of members concerned about the integrity of this website. It's worth mentioning that members did not recognize Jim's nearing hate speech regardless of its legal and constitutional limitations. To incite, to call for killing on sight of another American comes close if not arriving within the criminal code.

As for socialism, members remind us continually that the president is a socialist or communist. The country voted for him twice. The US operates within a mixed economy where your money, taxes are required to keep the industrial machinery running. When it broke down, your money was required to bail out the big boys, none of whom paid for their greed or went to jail.

So, are we talking about run of the mill, proletariat, socialism, or numero uno. Certainly, that would qualify as a 'big boy'. How come all the other big boys are greedy, jail worthy pond scum, and your big boy is a philanthropist. Strange, huh.

Soros sold out his own people to the most reprehensible group in history...the Nazi Socialist Party.
It is no surprise that he and his behavior is acceptable to some as today's socialists would just as consciously sell out their country and fellow citizens in their misguided beliefs in a failed political agenda. Soros wasn't misguided; he did it for the money, and he is still doing it for the money, power, and influence. His hatred of conservatism comes from Bush flatly rejecting the UN Small Arms Treaty when it first came up. Without U.S. support the treaty went nowhere, enraging Soros who is used to getting his way. This is why he has poured so much money into "progressive" groups and gun control in America. The person who is "fundamentally transforming" America is George Soros; Obama and his lackeys are just the tools. George Soros is no friend to anyone in any country who believes in individual freedom and neither is anyone who advocates a socialist agenda.
And yes, King; he has contributed money to "education" as long as the money goes to instilling socialism. This is called "propaganda", not education. I am familiar with many of his "educational" agendas having spent 30+ years in education. Soros learned well from the Nazis....instill beliefs in children at an early age and you will have a generation of voters coming up. You can't present a defense of this man, his beliefs, or his behavior in any way...give it up; he is despicable.

I have to laugh every time King says "voted for him twice" Obama lost the House Representative ( the "peoples house") the first shellacking and now with the most recent "shellacking" he has lost the Senate both historical numbers along with a majority of State races were,again by his own admission his "polices " were on the ballot.

All credible polls continue to show this country rejects socialism (and is center right) and knows we are AT WAR with radical Islam ,in spit of King and Oabama' refusal to admit it

Maybe you didn't recognize his face but I'll bet the two of you recognized his name. Brown on the other hand is Notorious for having a very "selective" memory.
Jim

Uh, let's take it a step further than Bullshit Flag and call it what it is... another of King Brown's many lies.

We have discussed Soros and his extreme Leftist and anti-gun proclivities here many times in the last few years, since King has made Misfires one of his favorite haunts. William Buckley's image has been in print thousands of times since King became a journalist, and now he is claiming he thought the photo of Soros might be Buckley. What a liar and fraud!

Is it surprising to anyone that King Brown would once again jump to the defense of an avowed anti-2nd Amendment Socialist? King would never call for the intervention of DaveW or a moderator if some Libtard expressed a similar opinion about Sarah Palin.

Interestingly, King defends Soros' near destruction of the British economy by bringing up the misdeeds and manipulations of certain New York financiers. Does King ever mention how the ones that contributed to Obama's campaign, also including GE Financial and General Motors GMAC, benefited from taxpayer funded bailouts under the TARP Fund?

Here's an interesting article on where the Koch brothers really stand. Hint: they are more Libertarian than evil Republican, and see just about anyone as being better than Obama and the Liberal Left:

http://www.mediaite.com/online/david-koc...t-be-surprised/

So once again, we have King supporting and defending the anti-gunner as he lies to us and claims to be pro-gun. We have King demonizing anyone who disagrees with his Leftist notions, going so far as to attempt to have GaryW punished or reprimanded for his opinions. He absolutely tried to put words in GaryW's mouth which he never said, and I don't know why Dave puts up with it. It is a disservice to all members. And we have King distorting the truth about the motivations of the Kock brothers.



Quote "What do we want?--- Dead Cops!--- When do we want it?--- Now!"... Quote by chanting rioting looting black crowds, incited and funded by George Soros. In the months that it has been going on, not a peep from the lying hypocrite King Brown. If he was concerned one bit about the integrity of this website, he'd stop lying to us and stop supporting anti-2nd Amendment Leftist Democrats.

Someone please show me where King says he doesn't know who Soros is. I can't find it anywhere on this thread. Not recognizing Soros is one thing. That's is partly the point of Jim's initial post....to identify the guy by image alone.

But pile on King for something he said, not something he didn't say. This is really getting ridiculous.

James, are you now going to try to say King the Liberal Left Socialist Liar has never seen an image of George Soros? King, the famous journalist... King, the fact checker extraordinaire who is constantly reading and looking things up? Really... are you that desperate to defend King?

He said he thought it was William Buckley in decline. Are you buying that? Stop pretending you don't know who and what King is.
This is getting ridiculous.

Dave, the US isn't the only country fighting radical Islam. Currently there's debate in Canada about our special forces' "training" role in Iraq with the pershmerga, teaching targeting for our F18 fighters; turns out they're on the front line guns blazing (which most of us figured they were doing anyway). If you prefer to believe the US isn't a mixed economy with government regulating in every sphere of human activity, that's okay with me. Obama's legitimacy: he's there because voters preferred him to GOP presidential candidates.

Keith, I know who George Soros is and occasionally I'm sure I have seen his picture. But I didn't recognize him from the picture posted. Neither did jOe and neither did King. Big deal.

You didn't answer the question I posed. Where did King say he didn't know who Soros was? Stay on topic Keith, don't try to wiggle away! LOL

Jim, of course you are correct (speaking on behalf of jOe here). Hard to imagine any of us here not know who Soros is.

However not recognizing him from one picture is a different thing and in my book, not a moral failing. King acknowledged he knew who Soros was in his first post once it had been made plain in the thread. Nowhere, in any post I have seen, does King suggest he doesn't know who Soros is.

Not sure I would recognize Harry Reid....he doesn't appear on the news much up here. Yet I know full well what a dick he is. Again, not a moral failing.

James:
I have no idea what King Brown posts any more as he is on my ignore list. I gave him the opportunity to admit he was lying in a previous thread and stand up like a man. Therefore my comment regarding his "selective memory" was a general one and anyone who has read his drivil over the years knows what I was stating.
Jim

He may well have won-or not,but he in no way was "preferred" by anything but the slimmest of margins over those who chose to go to the poll that Nov day.
King why do you continue to ignore the House and the Senate as if it has no say in governing of my country ?
BTW Obama has yet to say the words,nor anyone I can think of in his administration,"RADICAL ISLAM"

Dave:
I believe virtually everyone who can think now knows that Obama is a closet Muslim. He was born and raised as a Muslim and if he were to attack Islam he'd be attacking his own roots and beliefs. He has lied and cheated his way through the past 6 years with the aide of a compliant "mainsteam news media". Also lest we forget; That scumbag Soros funded Obama's 2008 campaign by funneling small but large numbers of contributions thru Africa.
He has done what he can to tear down American responsible society with Obamacare and his latest insult "Free 2 year college tuition".
Guess who the hell would end up paying for this free tuition?
Can anyone spell American taxpayers!
Jim

Obama won the first election because the liberal media refused to vet him properly in their delirious enjoyment over the first potential black president. They covered for him in the second election even to the extent of having a moderator interrupt Romney to defend Obama (unheard of by a presidential debate moderator)as Obama was floundering and Romney was moving in for the finishing jab. If the media had acted responsibly and done their job in the first election, it is doubtful if Obama would have won. The WH, aided by the media, shielded and stonewalled on so many scandals in his first term in order to win the 2nd election. If the truth ever comes out(and I pray it does) concerning the IRS, Benghazi, Veteran's administration, Fast & Furious and probably a baker's dozen more nefarious schemes that have not come to light, Obama and his entire administration (a lot of people)will be found to have engaged in numerous crimes up to and including felonies. Most of the democrats in congress are neck deep themselves in the IRS intimidation scandal. They were so scared of losing their seat to a Tea Party candidate. The Corruption-in-Chief lost the house due to Tea Party influence and the Senate by the widest margin in memory mainly because the public no longer allowed themselves to be shilled by a propagandist, cheerleader media that is as corrupt as his administration.

I couldn't agree more!

James, you know I don't try to wiggle away from anything. King absolutely did not say he didn't know who Soros was. I have no problem admitting that. I also never said he actually said that. He said he did not recognize the photo of Soros, and while I might believe it if ed good or some other Low Information Democrat apologist said it, I do not believe it coming from our resident compulsive liar. When Last Dollar told us he had no idea who Soros was, I absolutely believed him because he had strong opinions on things he knew nothing about. Another Low Information voter, now gone fishing.

I stand by my opinion and my belief that the extreme Liberal King has seen more than one crude pencil sketch of the Uber-Socialist who funds so many of his favorite causes and anti-gun Democrat politicians.

Do you have any comment on King Brown being outraged at the thought that someone might suggest killing a traitorous Nazi collaborator like Socialist Soros, but having no comment on the many blacks and black leaders who expressed or incited death threats which led to the actual killings of U.S. Police Officers? Or would you prefer to let that little hypocrisy go unchallenged?

And surely you noticed how, even when King Brown admitted to knowing of him, he cherry-picked what he knew and supported, and stayed far away from his vehement Anti-Gun activities. He didn't go near his backing of Move-On.org, the Obama campaign, the U.N. Small Arms Treaty, and the recent revelation that he poured over 33 million into inciting racial uprisings in the U.S. Again, where is King's outrage at Soros' funding of unrest that led to the killings and death threats of Police Officers?

Then King deftly tried, once again, to equivocate and transfer Soros' support of Liberal causes to those of the Koch brothers and other wealthy donors who donate to both Republicans and Democrats in order to cover their bases. Yet he did not show us where Soros ever once contributed to anything but the most radical Leftist causes or candidates, nor did he show us where the Koch brothers contributed to Left wing Democrats. He tried to portray David Koch as a Conservative Republican who "swings both ways"... no double entendre intended... when he is a well known Libertarian who actually ran for President on the Libertarian ticket. As a Libertarian, he may well vocally support some non-Conservative issues like gay marriage or pulling all U.S. troops from foreign excursions, but I don't see where he actually funded gay marriage initiatives.

This was just classic King Brown... constantly defending the anti-2nd Amendment Liberal Left Socialists whenever he can, and steering the conversation away from what they are actually doing to the country. If you wish to drink the King Brown Kool-Aid, I can't stop you. But don't ask me to pretend I don't see what he is and why he spends so much time here.

King
what is your opinion of abortion ; are you pro life or pro choice?

making a Billion on an British Treasury mistake is an extreme understatement of what he did and what he almost did to the British economy.

I want to know what "little oil" is. If we have Big Oil we must have "Little Oil" also. Are they not as bad?

If "he is said to have contributed $7 billion to education, health and other "progressive" causes" well then , Hitler spent billions on education, health and other causes so I guess he shouldn't be ridiculed either.

If you want to trivialize what Soros did "compared to what New York financiers did to America and overseas in the deepest recession of which the world is barely in half-recovery," then you are open to the comparison between Hitler's spending/ causes and Soros causes/programs/agenda. After all, Hitler had the German peoples best interests at heart. We wont focus on his negatives, just what he did to bring back the German economy , the morale of the country, nationalism, world standing. etc.

Cant have your cake and eat it too!!!

I'm am ignoring Brown but I can see from some of your responses he's trying to make the extreme problems caused by Soros actually trivial. Typical of a left wing Libtard.
Going right back to his beginnings he helped the Nazis round up Jews during WW II and he's Jewish himself. I can't think of a lower Judas scumbag then him. How anyone can make excuses for this type of dirtbag is a mystery to me. I am surprised that the Israelis haven't taken Soros out themselves although there may be a tacit understanding that you don't go after other Jews no matter what they have done. I think I'll email my Congresman and ask hint to ask Netanyahu about this when he addresses a joint session of Congress in March. I bet he won't be expecting this question.
Jim

I said a prayer yesterday for Jim and another on reading his latest. I like him for all his over-the-top passions. First, inciting to violence against an American citizen---"should" be shot on sight---and now imagining deep-trouble-at-home Netanyahu needing his advice passed through his congressman in Arizona.

I'm conflicted on life and death issues, Brian. It doesn't make sense to me that I'm against capital punishment but choose abortion to alternatives. I think of myself as a pacifist but I don't believe in peace at any price. I believe in "just" wars but their cost in innocents sickens. I froth at the mouth when guys like you serve and sacrifice for their countries---five times over for you, I believe---while folks at home believe it's a waste, a mistake. We both know the pros and cons of these issues. I can only add that I couldn't spring the trap and wouldn't pay a hangman to do it for me. I wouldn't want someone forcing their will on what I do with my body.

Just curious as to what are the alternatives to abortion? You either kill the infant or you don't.

Yes, and we do or don't for various reasons.

Don't be too conflicted, your thoughts are dem/lib talking points. Take a look at what you read, you know you don't have to regurgitate all of it. Interesting comment out of the middle though, you must froth when ever you blog on misfires. If I had a nickel for every time you mentioned war and waste, I'd buy you the Uncle Dan book, and a good Lefever with the left overs.

What reasons can possibly justify taking the life of the most innocent?

You must be referring to the thousands of innocent civilians that died during the course of the unneeded Iraq war. Many people agree with you Jim.

"Justify"---to show the justice, rightness or righteousness is at the crux of it. Pope Francis says who is to judge? Our conservative prime minister refused to play to his base, promised Canada the issue will not be raised on his watch, won't allow his members to raise it in the House of Commons. I gave an opinion and I'm sticking with Francis and Stephen Harper. To argue abortion serves no purpose here.

the best quote of the weekend, from Tea party member Rand Paul
"I do think diplomacy is better than war."

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/cruz-rubio-rand-paul-koch-bros

I guess consistency has its rewards, Craig. You're a generous man. I'm of a military family going back to Nelson at Trafalgar. I've interviewed hundreds of veterans. My closest buddy, 98, who served the guns six years of the war just entered the veterans' wing of the local hospital. When talk turns to war with veterans it's always the waste, the waste. No blowing. Never.

Mr. Paul is in step with his country. Look at the polls. America is sick of war. Iraq, its longest in history. The people say bring our men home.

Just curious as to your mindset, not arguing one way or the other. You did bring the subject up.

I understand. There's no question that can't be asked providing it can be seen as not mean, rude or mischievous. Actually Brian asked me the question about abortion. It was a fair question.

No SKB, I'm pretty sure JimH was talking about tens of millions of unborn U.S. babies who were aborted and disposed of like garbage. And guess what? These unborn babies weren't unfortunate enough to live in a Dictatorship that was in repeated violation of U.N. Sanctions and had expelled U.N. Weapons Inspectors, and whose murderous Dictator/President was claiming to have WMD and threatening to use them, just as he had done to his own Kurdish citizens.

Are you another of those Libtards who opposes the killing of violent murderers, yet supports the right of irresponsible mothers to terminate the life of an innocent unborn baby, when she could have prevented the pregnancy through abstinence or other non-lethal means?

So who or what do Atheists like you pray to King? Rocks? Dirt? Do you look in the mirror and pray to your egotistical self? Do you pray to Obama and other Anti-Gun Democrats who you obviously worship?

Would you care to comment on the wish or hope that a traitorous Nazi-collaborator scum-bag like Soros should be shot versus your hero Obama using Drones to actually kill U.S. Citizens abroad without Constitutional due process? No? I didn't think so.

Is Obama's sanctioned killing of American citizens with drone strikes and without due process better or worse to Libtards than a little friendly waterboarding?

Where did you see that Jim wished to pass advice through his Congressman to Netanyahu? Jim merely said he wanted to have his Congressman ask Bibi a question pertaining to Soros. Why are you trying to put words in his mouth and why are you trying to discredit Jim by saying something that you know not to be true... in other words... another of your many LIES.

I'm pretty sure Jim does not need any lying P.O.S. saying Atheist prayers to nothingness for him.

This is neither mean nor mischievous. It's just calling a spade a spade.

George Soros claims to be a United States citizen and he may have been a naturalized one at some time. However he has lived in Europe for many years primarily Hungary from what I understand s his "American Citizenship is in name only.
For those of you who don't know much about him other that he conspired with the Nazis to round up his his own Jewish neighbors during WW II here's some background information on this scumbag.
http://humanevents.com/2011/04/02/top-10-reasons-george-soros-is-dangerous/
Additionally an investigation by the Washington Times has uncovered the fact that he funded the left wing/communist Fergusion riots which makes it a fact that he's guilty of terrorism. Hence my statement that he should be humted down and shot like the terrorist dog he is.
I personally have been surprised that the Israelis didn't take him out a long time ago after what he did during WW II.
Although he has never ruled a country, He is right up there with Hitler,Stalin and Idi Amin as far as evil despots go down thru the years.
Jim

Human Events Powerful Conservative Voice......why does this not surprise me? I suspect Hungarian people have far better appreciation of him than you do. You should try their salami it is very good.

Dear god, now communists were behind the Ferguson riots, as if blacks and whites had to be communists to protest at what they perceived an injustice

Then extrapolating Soros, an American citizen giving money to protestors, as a terrorist to be shot like a dog. American extreme fundamentalism gone wild.

Since this line of unfair questioning has been resurrected by the mad hungarian, is it ok to ask.

Did you leave anything out of your comment above. 100% waste, ok let's call that fact. Of those hundreds, how many say, no way, I'd never do it again. Unless you seek out whiners and malingerers, I'll bet every one to a man says, however distasteful, I'd do it again for my country and my brothers.

Maybe ask, why the drum beat and mantra. Do you have a clicker next to the comp with target goals for repetition. I'm sure it works. I've noticed a trend, you've been calling for 'limited' censorship lately. Are talking points being circulated with implied marching orders? Awe never mind.

When Canada went to war, most thought it the best thing going to get away from lingering grey Depression, unemployment, and many British immigrants to fight for their former home country. To a man it was the greatest experience of their lives. Sure, they'd do it again, it was worth doing, but it wasn't all chivalric magnanimity; their regrets were the waste, the waste.

That's funny shit craigd, and I'm sure everyone has noticed how the good little Libtard soldier King Brown follows the DNC playbook to the letter.

"The waste, the waste"... blah, blah, blah, blather blather, so on and so forth, ad nauseum... give us a f-ing break already. It's like one of those old sleep learning tapes that endlessly repeat the same crap. I wonder how his wife puts up with him. She's gotta be a saint.

That's better you old Atheist... using the lower case g to spell God instead of your disingenuous "praying for Jim" crap.

I think Jim was making the point that it was extreme Left wingers, and Soros... to the tune of at least $33 million of his own money, who were the driving forces behind turning Constitutionally protected protest... no matter how wrong or misguided... into rioting, looting, and burning. From day one, it appeared that it was the outsiders that were bussed in by Liberal Leftist groups hell bent on fomenting tensions that caused 98% of the problems, along with race hustlers like Al Sharpton.

There are laws in this country against inciting riots, and the actions of Soros and others can be readily linked to untold millions of $ in damage, renewed racial tensions, massive costs to taxpayers for Police and National Guard protection, and the deaths of two NYC Police Officers. And all you can worry about is someone's wish or belief that a Nazi sympathizer/traitor to his own people scumbag like Soros should be shot??? We don't have the Thought Police you'd like to see here yet King, and Jim still has the right to his opinions... with which many of us agree. Jim threatened no one, but you wish to make a big deal out of nothing while ignoring the egregious legal and human rights violations done by Obama and other Liberals.

What motivates you to be such a dishonest and hypocritical piece of "the waste, the waste"?

"Of those hundreds, how many say, no way, I'd never do it again. Unless you seek out whiners and malingerers, I'll bet every one to a man says, however distasteful, I'd do it again for my country and my brothers."

WWII, sure you will get those kind of answers. Iraq? Much less likely. It is pretty hard to see how Iraq was a real threat to us here in the U.S.A. and it is also quite obvious that the Iraq war was a mistake and a total waste of resources and lives.You can try to re-frame it anyway you like but it always comes out the same.....We should never went in to Iraq and it will forever be a stain on the Bush(shrub that it) administration's legacy.

The Bottom Line:

Iranian born Valerie Jarrett is more of a President than Obama is and she is an enemy within through and through. Digging all the way down to who is behind the Fergusion riots, you find a cadre of communists, radicals, Islamists, Progressives and in the end, the face behind the chaos is the Muslim Brotherhood-connected visage of the President’s consigliere – the voice of Iran and a devout Marxist, Valerie Jarrett.

He would get my vote. It's too bad he isn't going to the Republican nomination.

Well, here's Stevie again, still fighting the Iraq war and those who took us there. Does Stevie understand that the greatest "...waste, the waste" is the total waste of lives and resources that resulted when we pulled out prematurely and simply allowed everything we fought for to fall back into the hands of Islamic Extremists under the control of Iran?

Does anyone think that Stevie will hold the same kind of grudge against Hillary Clinton in 2016 that he has for the "Shrub"? Because as you can see here, Hillary, John Kerry, Chuck Schumer, Barbara Boxer, Harry Reid, and a slew of other Dumbocrat Senators voted Yes on the Resolution to authorize Bush to invade Iraq.

Following is an alphabetical listing by state of how each senator voted on President Bush's Iraq resolution. A "yes" vote was a vote to grant President Bush the power to attack Iraq unilaterally. A "no" vote was a vote to defeat the measure. Voting "yes" were 29 Democrats and 48 Republicans. Voting "no" were 1 Republican, 21 Democrats, and 1 Independent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/senaterollcall_iraq101002.htm

I'll bet Stevie will hold his nose and vote for the anti-2nd Amendment Lady Hillary Clinton, because that's what Libtard gun owners who can't think for themselves do.

Geography is considered outcast subject and very challenging to grasp even for well educated Americans. Gee, perhaps some of those voting thought Iraq was Iran. The country name differs by just ONE letter.

Well Jagermeister, I'm pretty sure you are also the kind of Libtard who would vote for the anti-gun Democrat every time... even if they were so stupid as to not know the difference between Iraq and Iran.

I have not yet met even one Dumbocrat who can tell me anything of what was in the Resolution to invade Iraq the second time. Most still think we were retaliating for the attack on 9-11. Most also seem to think that Bush unilaterally went to war without the approval of a majority of the Democrats in the Senate. That's because most are a bunch of brainless DNC Sheeple who let their Union leaders do their thinking for them.

Well, well, wouldn't you know: an American woman in the White House was behind the Ferguson riots. A Muslim Brotherhood acolyte to boot!

It's obvious who the radicals are here.

That's true Burger King. Or would you have us believe that it was only the good people of Ferguson who looted and burned their town?

Why of course you would, you dishonest old radical!

P.S.--- Jim doesn't see your posts anymore because he became disgusted with your incessant lies and bullshit.

and here I thought this warm front was due to a Santa Anna wind. Nope, just more hot air from lower class Kieth. I do love my ignore button.

So that's all you've got Little Stevie Blunder? No surprises there. It doesn't take much cranial capacity to be one of those DNC drones and Low Information Voters.

Well it's obvious he doesn't love his spell check.
* Santa Anna(sic) actually Santa Ana
* Kieth(sic) actually Keith

Jim, you also have to wonder how someone who is ignoring my posts still sees them.

Just another Libtard fraud like King Brown.

And the bottom line still is the Iraq war was a mistake. Say what you will but that debacle with be with us decades to come and will be forever associated with W. and the GOP. Gee Jim, even you could admit that the war was a mistake in the past. what changed? Election season getting closer and you feel the need to circle the wagons? The truth will set you free.....

You been hit'n that bOng pipe again ?

The bottom line is you used the word 'was', and we are now in a distinct and new war. The truth is, it's okay now because you feel like it's okay. I doubt you've been set free by jumping on your bandwagon, you're bound to help cover for the mistakes happening this very day.

Wrong Craig. I'm happy to acknowledge the mistakes of today's administration. There are many. Where to start with the current administration? Obama care? The manipulation of the economic indicators such as unemployment? Poor recovery from the great recession? Poor foreign policy decisions. The list goes on for the failures under Obama. I'm much more interested in the truth than covering up from that bozo.

And not a single bit of the current administrations short comings make the Iraq war a good decision under Bush.

I never once said I agreed with what is currently happening in our new war. You are putting words in my Craig. Not your typical style.

Go ahead and give it one more try. Why was invading Iraq a good idea? It wasn't and that is painfully obvious. Acknowledging the fact would be a real good thing for the GOP.

Backing up to this one a bit. 'Much less likely', maybe not, King says all of the hundreds with no distinction of what era. 'It is pretty hard to see', doesn't all that say is that it is there to see. In the end, all I get out of it is that you personally didn't like the policy, and you make fun of the person.

I think there's also a significant distinction between personal attacks, without facts, from an easy chair in the heartland, and the foot soldier bound by an oath doing their duty. We are 'talking' about the selflessness of that individual, and I don't think their sacrifice should be politicized because of feelings.

It gets back around to sooner or later your current favorite should take responsibility for his policy. If you're right about the waste, it should hold on this second time around, anyway 'you try to re-frame it'. As to waste of resources, your guy has more than borrowed and printed 'resources' to dwarf that war mistake. I bet it's not enough and you're not satisfied, but maybe a good start.

Skb:
I've stated many times that winning the war in Iraq,while initiating it was IMO a mistake, could be accomplished but winning the peace was another matter entirely. This war was won under the Bush administration and the peace lost when the incompetent idiot occupying the White House withdrew all support contrary to the recommendations of his senior military officials.
If the current occupant of the White House has "gotten anything right" in 6 + years it's news to me.
As fellow gun owners we need to be united in 2016 to make sure that another incompetent fool like Clinton is kept out of the White House so we can begin rebuilding what has been lost in this Country as far as credibility and prestige and repairing the economic disaster this administration has created.
Jim

I stand by it from the very beginning of these 'discussions'. We, the US not some vague coalition, need strategic military bases, permanently, as eyes, ears and for response capability in that unstable hot bed of this world. Hey, maybe bo should have lunch with the Israeli PM, likely a bargain for us.

I don't think we have the will to 'win' anything over there most of all 'hearts and minds'. The waste is 'nation building', the rhetoric should be rolled out in name only for tv clips. Didn't we have to ask permission from 'friends', who had their social media jihadi network, to enter the area.

An honest look around the world and through history can show that strategic US military bases easily have the ability to stabilize problem countries, leaders and movements.

My current favorite? Your fairly proficient this morning at twisting things. I have stated several times on this forum that BO may be the worst president ever. That now makes him my favorite? Come on now Craig you have to be better than that.

You seem to want to wipe away all of W's failings by pointing out those of BO. How does one cancel the other? The way I see it both of our last two presidents were completely incompetent.

As to the soldiers, I feel a great debt to them for the sacrifice they made. They served our country bravely and with valor. I know a few Veterans who served in Iraq. I can not say all of them seem to be convinced the war was worth while. None of this makes the decision to invade Iraq a good one.

So other than saying BO has made bigger mistakes W, which seems to your main line of reasoning, how again was the Iraq war a good idea? It was not. Try again and this time maybe attempt to refrain from putting words in mouth? I know you can do it.

Steven, you may mention that bo is the worst president ever, but you don't explain it or personally attack him like you do the previous. Yes, I spin things, not because that makes it right or better, but I find it interesting that it's a tactic that you're comfortable with, but uncomfortable on the receiving end.

I never said the previous president was without justified criticism for his policy, but you're the one that made fun of his name and gave him a legacy that you might be able to better than that. The previous president worked with a hostile congress, spent gobs but didn't have near the cajones of the current fellow, and stopped attacks on the homeland. Maybe if he shoots his mouth off constantly like the one right before him, I guess ok in your book, his stock might go up a bit.

To add another reason to my clear, in my mind, need for eyes and ears in hot spots. I'd also add, these bad guys do not, period, understand 'talk'. They live and die by the sword, and only respect the big dog in town. The use of military lethal force is absolutely necessary, how, when and where it's applied should be up for debate. I could only guess that you think it's possible to talk the iranians down from their nuclear weapon program and development of delivery systems.

The military costs money, no question. I don't think I put words in your mouth. I'm just pointing out, inconsistencies. If you think it lacks substance and fact, reread the quote picked and the part I snipped out for substance.

Decent 'conversation' Steven, but you have a foregone conclusion. Iraq invasion bad, then things go round in circles. You can do better than that. I never said iraq = good, did I, you put that thought in my mouth. I did say that I believe there're hugely important points to consider that have been squandered. I also never said the decision to go was not up for debate, but the duty of the troop taking orders on the ground, shouldn't be constantly intermixed as you prefer to repeat.

What makes you hold back from criticism of the current fellow owning some of his decisions and results. You do know that bo said we won, they can take care of themselves, we can leave. Without putting words in your mouth, your silence does have a clear message to me.

I just rattled off a list of BO's deficiencies and stated he has more. Apparientltly I have not attacked him with sufficient ferocity for you. I'll try to be more denigrating to him in the future so as you do not misunderstand. I do not like BO in the least.

I feel that having eyes and ears in worlds hot spots is no reason to start a war. If that really was the justification for invading Iraq maybe it should have been presented to America and the world as such. Saddam Hussein presented zero threat to us here in the USA. That was the reason the American public was given for this war, not so we have intelligence gathering capabilities.

I guess maybe we both have very different views on world politics. The reasons you stated for war fall far short of what I would consider valid. How many others countries should we invade to gather intelligence Craig? I think we can do better as a country than that.

So Jim what you have done? Left our troops in Iraq with zero legal protection and subject to the Iraqi justice system? That is what negotiations broke down over If I remember correctly.

I do not approve of BO, but had he done that the repercussions would not have been good for our soldiers.

It's crass to draw attention to members for misspelling or hitting the wrong key, an overbearing rudeness. None is blameless for misspelling. We all do it. How persons spell is not an indicator of character or intelligence. What counts is what we mean by our words.

I know I'm on Jim's ignore list, which is fine with me. I answer his as a caution that there's already enough rudeness here without picking on members for their spelling. There's also a peculiar notion here that by my not engaging with a particular member I'm not ignoring him because I read his posts.

It's essential for some to feel their opinions are so important they are not being ignored: hey look everyone, my posts are being read, see, I'm not being ignored even if he doesn't reply to my posts. Reading and not caring to engage are two different things. Jim has his way and I have mine; both are happy as clams.

Thanks for telling me about the latest personal swipe from Brown since he's on my ignore list. The ONLY reason I'm commenting is to demonstrate just how far out in touch with reality he is. If you look at my post there's a grin attached to it. That indicates to all but the densest that the post isn't meant to be serious.
Now maybe you can see why he's being ignored.

But King, it's the reason that you don't care to engage certain people at certain times that's so amusing and tells us so much about you.

In my case, you made the false claim that I put words in your mouth after I had quoted you verbatim... (that's word-for-word, for SKB). Later you made the equally false claim that I had "dishonoured" your father, when nothing could be further from the truth.

You also dance away from other people at various times when they catch you in a lie or confront your bullshit. You can never admit it when you are wrong, and you think we'll all forget your Lies or Anti-Gun rhetoric when you just disappear for a day or two, or just bow out of a particular thread. A fresh case in point is your non-response to Brian in reference to his position on deserters like Bergdahl which was 180 degrees out of phase with your typical Libtard Leftist crap. Brian made Obama look like the incompetent that he is, and there was no way you could parse it differently... so you dance away from it.

You are the most dishonest, disingenuous, hypocritical person to ever soil this board. And you don't like it that's it's being illuminated. The most egregious rudeness here is from you telling us Lies in order to advance your Leftist agenda. Why don't you tell everyone that Jim is ignoring you because he is disgusted with you and your incessant Lies and Bullshit... and tired of trying to get a pathological prevaricator (you) to admit that he was presenting falsehoods.

Little Stevie Blunder still can't let go of that Bush. I wonder when it was that Bush 43 became a dictator? Maybe Stevie can tell us, because he acts as if Bush unilaterally took this country into war with Iraq.

Here's a Senate Roll Call of the Vote on the Resolution to Invade Iraq:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/transcripts/senaterollcall_iraq101002.htm

Little Stevie Blunder never ever seems to mention the names of leading Dumbocrats who, acting on the same somewhat flawed intel as Bush, voted to take out Saddam Hussein... who absolutely was in violation of U.N. Sanctions levied against him.

I have already mentioned that Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Dianne Feinstein, and Chuck Schumer agreed with Bush. Joe Biden was another leading Dumbocrat who voted to go in. Other leading Dumbocrats such as Bill Clinton also felt Saddam needed to be taken out. Gallup polling at the time showed 86% support of the American public too.

A big problem was that after a wildly successful entry, many of these same supporters of the war began pushing for limiting the U.S. Troops effectiveness, and called for stricter rules of engagement. We had unfortunately given Saddam many months to either hide or dismantle many of his WMD, but some were still actually found... something that people like SKB will never ever mention. Then we saw the very same Democrats who voted to go to war turn on Bush and act like they had no involvement. When the insurgency was allowed to gain a foothold and we began seeing more casualties from IED's, etc., we began to really see the effects of the massive military budget cuts under Bill Clinton. Remember those inadequately armored HumVees, and Rumsfields' famous line, "You go to war with the army you have."

I'll believe SKB's "I'm a Conservative" act when we start seeing him blaming Democrats for massive and costly foreign policy blunders. Until then, I'm throwing the Bullshit Flag. He did manage to take this thread off of the original topic of extreme anti-gunner and uber-socialist and Left Wing Democrat supporter George Soros. Maybe that was his full original intent.

King is right about the occasional spelling error. We all do it, and it's easy enough to do when you're typing quickly. But when you make repeated errors and don't go back and correct them as SKB does, that suggests that ignorance or stupidity might be involved.



... so sayeth the window licker.

Very different views Steve, but that's ok. I'm not so sure we're fighting any country, but the threat of invasion should be on the table for any country that threatens the security of the US. We don't need to invade the entire middle east, just have strategic bases.

Now, nuts and bolts time, what can we do better as a country. I don't suspect we're better off likening a previous president to a stain, or by ignoring, out of sight out of mind, the iranian inconvenience. Since they're in the neighborhood, do you see iran as any sort of a regional or world problem.

Sure I do Craig. I see the same in North Korea, and with the recent Russian aggression among other problem places in the world. I think invasion should be on the table as well, as a last resort.

I do not think invading countries to establish strategic bases is an ethical way forward for our country. If it is, how are we any different from the Russians? How many more countries need to be invaded to establish these much needed bases? If these bases were the true reason for us going to war, do you feel that the public should have been told or you OK with the WMD story? Is it possible that policies along those lines contribute to the feeling in the mid-east that the USA is promoting imperialism for its own benefit?

What can we do better as country? lets look real hard at last weekends quote by Mr. Paul again.

"I do think diplomacy is better than war."

That would be an excellent place to start.

Too bad we can't all agree on a face of true evil because, at this point, America could really make good use of a scapegoat. We need something to blame for our problems.

People hold strong beliefs about what America is and we desperately want events to align with our ideals. Unfortunately, lots of stuff has gotten all fucked up lately. Stuff like Iraq. Suddenly views previously held as unquestionable are increasingly coming into doubt. This makes people upset and pissed. If I was an old man, looking upon what has become of my once great country, I too would be pissed. Then I would get very drunk.

We need something or someone to blame. Soros, Bush, Obama, Libtards, Neocons….whomever. Alternatively, some pretend all is well. I think King Brown tries to do the latter, and why not?

In the old days we’d burn a witch at the stake and all feel better. Now we just call each other stupid -or put them on the ignore list. Most of you would probably get along in real life.

North korea is an example I had thought about, relative peace and stability for some sixty years....by planting a US military base on the DMZ. What a waste eh, but then again maybe preferable to letting Gen. Mac. roll into china, then again maybe a huge mistake not to let him roll.

WMD's, inconvenient, but they're there and some are accounted for. Is it enough, maybe not, but it's a reason that has been shown to be true, even if not agreeable with the left or right.

I'm not too worried about what the world 'thought' about us. Do you think they'd attack NY, oh wait a minute they had already done that. Best scenario, it's the video.

If you look back, as distasteful as it is, the un, meaning the negotiators that can fix anything, passed umpteenth resolutions against iraq with a truck load of negotiating. You're not putting words in my mouth that diplomacy shouldn't be tried first, or second, or third, etc. Do you have an answer for when's enough. Paul's an isolationist at all cost, he probably wouldn't let English doubles ship.