M.I.A. Caught In Legal War With NFL Over Super Bowl Middle Finger

That's all fine and dandy. I never said I could change the capriciousness and hypocrisy of corporations.



However, that wasn't the point you tried to make in your original comment where you said that she violated her contract and is rightfully subjected to the lawsuit brought on by the NFL.



My point was that others violate the conduct clauses of their contracts vastly more egregiously and that these other violators are left alone. If the NFL truly cared about the image vs. getting a pound of flesh, they'd have been hauling dozens of players into court every year.



I'm no lawyer, but I can't believe that any court will accept an argument from the NFL that alleges this brat caused $1.5 million in damage to the league. AJ Hawk did the same thing while playing in a game (toward his bench) on live TV and was fined - hold onto your hat!!!! - $10,000. Based on that, the Riley Cooper pass, and plain common sense, any jurist would, or at least should, laugh this allegation out the door. It's obviously a petty, personal vendetta. And selective enforcement in every venue is not tolerated by courts.



Of course, if AJ Hawk was fined $1.5 million and Riley Cooper was fined something north of $1 million, then I'd have agreed with your initial statement - treat everyone the same. However, like most courts. I'm against cherry-picking your contract enforcement work because it's, plain and simple, unjust.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

How <i>The Guardian</i> Is Quietly and Repeatedly Spying on You

Wow, what news! Corporations have congress in their pockets? Zowie! Next thing you're gonna tell me is the sun will come up again tomorrow - I can't take all this at once!



Somehow between your stunning revelation and name-calling, you missed the point. No one at Booz Hamilton has the authority or ability to put me away. Period. You may think they do, but they can't. No one at a federal prison or CIA-controlled facility is going to obey their orders.



Similarly, a Congressperson can't put me away. A lot of people need to be spun up, paperwork has to be done, authorizations have to be sought - and none of these critters has the courage to go that far for anyone.



It's infuriating that the patriot act allows a president to convict someone of terrorism and sentence them without a trial. But ultimately, it's only the president (and make no mistake, Obama WANTS this power) who has that authority to take an order from a rich person and put you away.



Any other path requires a ton of coordination and collusion and isn't gonna happen except like how cheney and bush railroaded some Dems in the south. I'm sure you remember those - but I suspect you forgot that Obama REFUSES to pardon those victims nor investigate those actions.



Given the above, I see you have good reason to fear Obama because he's as corrupt as the last few administrations. So disregard my previous statement - I should be
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Why the Congressional Resolution on Chemical Weapons Is Completely Different From Iraq War Resolution

1. Clearly you're not sharp enough to understand that he can't say what's in and not in the classified reports. So you have to read between the lines. Of course, you don't need to read what he's got to say about the situation - you already know everything! All he's had in his hands is the sum of all evidence, but you have better insight than that, right?! Pathetic.



3. So some insipid bumper-sticker slogan from you somehow invalidates his analysis? There was a character on an old sitcom that would wave his arms and declare that he was invisible... and obviously remain in plain view. You've decided to model your logic after his and it's just as strong.



4. Sounds like your "I'm morally offended and someone will pay!" trumps all reason. Your outrage is so impressive!



5. Others are apparently less impressed with the evidence.



6. So for your tortured logic to work, you're saying that Ukraine (or one of the "certain foreign countries") has a right to bomb Houston in order to kill bush. Because that's the only way the comparison works. Taking someone into custody when on their soil and putting them on trial is whole lot less of an act of war than summarily executing acts of war. I'm surprised the concept is lost on you - but there it is.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Why the Congressional Resolution on Chemical Weapons Is Completely Different From Iraq War Resolution

1. Yes, there is.

- Try again. Per Alan Grayson who has read the 4 page unclassified brief and the 12-page classified brief on "proof" - he's very disappointed. He compares it highly unfavorably to the mountain of data received from HRC on Bengazi.



2. Creamer never said there was something to win.

- You've obviously missed my point which is to counter the article's title. Was that too obvious?



3. This president is not trying to pick a winner in a civil war; John McCain is.

- The link to Soltz's piece is in my comment. Read it to get a up to speed on the sides in that war and how bombing impacts it - or stay in the dark, your choice.



4. That is not our problem because it is not our war.

- Every action has a reaction.



5. Saudi Arabia has stated publicly it supports us attacking Assad. In the ME, that's all that counts.

- Last count I saw is about 5 countries now that support. Out of what, 200? My point was that more countries supported the Iraq invasion.



6. It's called crimes against humanity.

- The United Nations is the internationally recognized entity charged with handling those crimes. Not Obama. "Rule of Law?" "Act of war?" Either of these matter to you?



Try answering the relevant questions and not the ones you feel like answering.

- You go first.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Why the Congressional Resolution on Chemical Weapons Is Completely Different From Iraq War Resolution

In debates such as this, I defer to better authorities than "sources." Someone like Jon Soltz who was on the ground in Iraq. In his latest piece on this subject (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-soltz/the-military-case-against_b_3865965.html), he notes that both rebels AND Syrian government troops fought against us in Iraq.



That fact should give anyone riding their soapbox of righteous indignation a moment of pause and step down for a bit.



Here are the things that are EXACTLY like Iraq:

* There is no concrete evidence to support our government's position as judge, jury and executioner.

* There is nothing to "win" in any action at all. If assad DID use these weapons, he will clearly have no less compunction to do whatever he wants against innocents.

* Whatever side "wins" the civil war, most of the combatants will not be sending us a thank you note for our part (we will be welcomed in Iraq, remember?).

* There is no end game here.

* No one else in the world community, other than France (it's almost hilarious if it weren't so utterly strange), who will sign up for this. OK, so this may be an exception, there is LESS support in the world for this action....

* We continue to feel like we are some high authority ordained to mete out justice around the globe.



I probably missed a few others, too.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

The Military Case Against Syria Strikes

I thought the reason we did up Iraq was to send a message to the world that the US wasn't going to tolerate yellow cake-wielding, citizen-gassing dictators attacking their populace.



Are you trying to say we didn't make the point?!?!



Well, fret not Jon, our President, dubya the second, will set the record straight THIS time... all we need is blind faith in Him... the Him who is seated on most high and is incapable of error.... He is leading the World right now in their unanimous support for US military action.... and this time, He will fix all that is broken in Syria because it is our solemn obligation as Americans to blindly follow Him.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Howard Dean On Syria: Obama Won't Be Damaged If Congress Votes No

In the former Yugoslavia, evidence of genocide was everywhere and was publicized pretty openly.



In this case, not so much.



Was there an attack using gas? Yes. After that, there's a little bit of work to do to prove this was perpetrated by the person(s) the President is determined to attack. And yellow cake is absolutely a pertinent allegory. Whether or not the president at that time lied about yellow cake is moot - the point is that there was no evidence to back up the claim and the claim was used to justify desired action.... just like there is no evidence yet to conclusively prove the source of this attack in Syria.



As he's done several times before, this President has demonstrated his willingness to believe lies (the Brown firing and the Acorn defunding are the two most known ones) and then act impulsively on them in self-destructive and humiliating ways - and all done to get along with the cool kids that he so desperately seeks to be validated by: the republicans.



Of course, I expect a small piece of circumstantial evidence to be found, but the UN investigation is still ongoing and the president has already concluded that a strike is required or else our nation's credibility is at stake. This sounds very much like a man on a mission - facts and evidence be damned.... just like bush's mission.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Decision On U.S. Syria Attack Wins Applause From Skeptical Liberals

Not surprising to see your 3rd grade retorts.



You are so off you don't even see the absurdity of your unreasonable propositions. Just look at the first one (not that you are capable). Obama doubled down on the bush-bernanke bailout to avoid the depression. Therefore, you're equating Obama's intelligence to that of bush. After all, bush had the idea first. Therefore, bush - by your "logic" - is definitively the most skilled president in history above Obama.



For reasons unknown, you're completely lost in your opinions and convinced that they are fact (even when they are incontrovertibly opinions - and not even opinions which survive any scrutiny). You aren't just confused, you have a condition that requires treatment.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost