Posted on 01/21/2011 8:59:04 AM PST by markomalley
He will obviously say anything in order to sell his book.
I am convinced it is genetic.
You just have to see a group of them tegether.
I was at a militant lesbian rally (by accident!!!) once and I swear that was the only time in my life I was afraid I was going to get my ass kicked. (I am 6’5 and 240)
These ‘women’ looked and acted so much like men that the only thing giving them away were some sort of breasts showing under their t-shirts.
I know there are beautiful women who are lesbian too... but not in this group.
Whenever a leftist rodent calls you a “war criminal” it is only because you targeted their mass murdering terrorist allies.
They couldn’t care less about the tiny children blown to pieces by roadside bombs. The leftist vermin and their Muslim allies exist for the sole purpose of feeding off of human beings and spreading unlimited misery throughout the world.
And Ron Reagan should be committed ...
I’m trying to figure out how Michael Reagan (adopted) managed to get Ronald Reagan’s DNA. Ron is no son of Reagan in my book.
When it comes to Dick Cheney, Ron Reagan joins popular voices to memorialize as torture legitimate steps this civilized society took to protect itself from catastrophe. This person and the associates he cherishes obscure public awareness of past and continuing unprecedented security threats to enjoy a distorted, personal moral orthodoxy. These distractions create a complacency enabling them to criminalize Cheney, which in turn criminalizes people who jeopardize their lives to counter enemies so dissociated from country or culture, so committed to butchery; they best match Webster’s definition for a virus.
This present denunciation and historical condemnation proceeds from people without a moral compass who believe political capital and moral authority can be earned at a safe distance in time and space by those going into harm’s way our behalf. Their crime involves validating demands for asymmetrical morality undefiled by any perception of danger. To placate those coveting such luxurious, dilemma-free morality one must ignore military and intelligence professionals facing shrewd, ruthless enemies obscured behind frightening uncertainties.
Terrorists never display the civility required for Geneva Convention definitions for militia, armed force, or volunteer corps. Terrorists are not insurgents or freedom fighters, and when captured, certainly not prisoners of war. These killers are not members of an organized resistance movement carrying arms openly, and they have no distinctive identifier. The Geneva Conventions describe terrorists as beyond the pale.
The Geneva Convention framers were parents and grandparents of the “Greatest Generation”, and held powerful positions throughout the darkest times of our world. Their words synthesize a brutal, durable morality properly earned from suffering through the ultimate bloody deluges of the 20th century. The people writing the Conventions intended to isolate terrorist forces, provide them minimal protections, and allow destruction with any overwhelming furies needed to crush their abominations.
Terrorists earning degrees in physical/biological sciences will abandon the trivial killing of hundreds to anticipate the incalculable deaths available from 21th century technology. They will exploit a world with ubiquitously available nuclear technology and material, with the diseases that decimated Europe located one step away in the food chain, and with technology for cottage industries to produce lethal toxins and pathogens.
We know terrorists remain unresponsive to direct questioning and psychological gambits. Therefore, effective interrogation necessitates applying all stress and coercion techniques our military encounters in survival schools, including waterboarding. Effective interrogation requires combining these techniques within a continually confused and uncertain environment.
If the only information obtained is a confession or an assumed desired answer, then incorrect questions have been asked. The intelligence acquired remains as unreliable as that from satellite surveillance, double agents, or cryptanalysis. Even independent verification leaves lingering uncertainties and critical hazards conquered only through resolute leadership. However, the alternative to narrowing the uncertainties is unimaginable slaughter.
My Representative Peter DeFazio quoted to me 20 former Army interrogators who said, “Prisoner/detainee abuse and torture should be avoided at all costs”. I find the assertion disturbing, because on 9/11 we were prepared to shoot down any civilian airliner, which did not land immediately, regardless of crew assertions.
An incredible moral disconnect enabled killing our own citizens on 9/11, but now forbids subjecting terrorists to severe discomfort to prevent extravagant murder and destruction. At what point in application of chemical, biological and atomic weapons to our society must we protect the American people “at all costs”?
For Ron Reagan, Peter DeFazio, and similar popular advocates, the definition for U.S. victory must reside wholly within interrogation processes maintaining their tranquil, self-created moral high ground, which affirms their illusory definition of national greatness. Islamic jihadists define victory as U.S. submission through elaborate and extensive slaughters. Given jihadists avoid desired scenarios for conflict; they win by their definition. However, according to now popular assertions as presented in this editorial, we perish by the tens of thousands, but win by our definition.
And Ron Reagan Jr is an undickded sissy
boy.
I feel it can be both.
There are some people that seem to try being gay like it's a new outfit. Anne Heche is a perfect example.
There are a few other stars that also tried being gay like it was a fashion statement, and then ran back to the opposite sex.
However, there are some people that have certain looks and mannerisms, and it convinces me that it can't possibly come from anything other than genetics.
Obviously, Jane did a better parenting job than Nancy.
IMO, the only positive thing about Nancy Reagan is...she was loved by Ronald Reagan.
More “civility” from the left.
- JP
Ron Reagan, what a real P.O.S. !!!! Bringing more disgrace to his father’s namesake !
Thanks for posting it.
Leni
Thank you. Once again I managed to resist the language I learned during my four years of active duty with the Navy.
And Ron Reagan is a certifiable crazy ass scumbag.
Ron goes bonkers again.
Leni
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.