Mike Luckovich cartoon
Obama uses his weekly address today to compare Syrian refugees to the Pilgrims.
“And I’ve been touched by the generosity of the Americans who’ve written me letters and emails in recent weeks, offering to open their homes to refugees fleeing the brutality of ISIL. …” he says. “Nearly four centuries after the Mayflower set sail, the world is still full of pilgrims — men and women who want nothing more than the chance for a safer, better future for themselves and their families. What makes America America is that we offer that chance.”
What is ironic is that liberals of his ilk have for years slandered the Pilgrims as rapacious, land-stealing, disease-spreading invaders who murdered the peaceful natives and foisted on the survivors their religion of conquest and slavery.
Comparisons can be taken to their logical or illogical, as the case may be, conclusions, depending on your view of history.
4TH ST8 
He and his enablers understand that most people have short memories and that there is always a new audience, new empty headed people that have only recently awoken to politics, now, sadly, ir’a for his time in politics. For me it was FDR, I understood he was the main man but older people were as dubious of him as I now am of Obama. We had a battery powered radio and when FDR came on with his Fireside Chat my father would turn off the radio saying “I’m not wasting battery on that SOB.”. Now I just switch channels.
Huh???
When did President Obama ever say anything bad about the pilgrims?
http://theweek.com/cartoons/590836/editorial-cartoon-thanksgiving-refugees-pilgrims
His ilk.
“His ilk”??
Who be they?
I had to smile, Thomas. It reminds me of a cartoon with a couple of Indians watching pioneers getting off of a ship. One says to the other, “Let’s let them stay. What possible harm can they do?”
I saw that one, too, Rincon.
If the Republicans don’t get their shit together (and eject Trump), Clinton WILL be the next president of the USA…I said it before, Trump is working for Clinton. Now it appears Obama’s own weakness helps Democrats instead of hurting them!
And Donald is starting his crazy dance, mocking a disabled journalist just the other day.
“To refer to ISIS, as he did Sunday in Malaysia as “a bunch of killers with good social media,” shows not only the president’s much-lamented lack of leadership, but an almost scary detachment from reality.
Coming on top of the slow-motion collapse of the jerry-built health-care reform and the lingering death of the Pacific trade agreement, the key components of what Obama hoped to leave as his mark on history are slipping away.”
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/obamas-weakness-on-isis-benefits-clinton-not-the-republicans-2015-11-25
Happy tryptophan day! (yes, nyppatrick, I know it doesn’t make you sleepy)
http://www.duffelblog.com/2014/11/pardoned-white-house-turkey-defects-isis/?utm_content=buffer87b5f&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
I see there has been another violent terrorist attack on the homeland – this time in Colorado Springs.
Turkey defected….
Not funny
as humorous as yours was
OK how about another satisfied ACA enrollee….
Current report is that the terrorist has injured 4 police officers. Other casualties unknown at present
Turkey terrorist, or possible two turkey terrorists.
Or satisfied ACA beneficiary’s….
Police officer has now died
Rumor…..and you neglected to mention the civilian.
Yes – civilian also killed in terrorist attack
Still not official and it’s now rumored two people in addition to the cop are dead.
Two people in addition to the cop are rumored dead. Nothing official yet. Twitter and “sources” only, so far.
Post being held up for the link?
9 injured at the Planned Parenthood center in addition to the 3 dead
327,000 innocent unborn “little ones” were killed and dismembered and their body parts put up for sale at Planned Parenthood facilities in fiscal 2014. As heinous and misguided as this recent cowardly attack in Colorado was…it pales in comparison to what goes on at Planned Parenthood day in…and day out, with no disdain whatsoever from our resident progressive socialist leftists. So little nyper…do us all a favor and stay on topic or stfu.
So you don’t have any problem with last night’s terrorist attack. It “pales in comparison …” etc.
So you don’t have any problem with ripping little humans into pieces and selling their parts?
Your accusation that Planned Parenthood sells fetal tissue is completely untrue. There have been multiple investigations by congressional committees and by state and local law enforcement agencie of this accusation. Not one of those investigations has substantiated your accusation. Not one.
Perhaps you should consider whether the widespread dissemination of false accusations like the one you have just made creates a climate in which deranged terrorists like Robert Lewis Dear are encouraged to commit violent acts.
“Missouri became the sixth state to investigate Planned Parenthood and find no wrongdoing — just as the organization’s president prepares to testify before a House committee Tuesday for the first time since an anti-abortion group released secretly recorded videos accusing the group of illegally profiting from fetal tissue.
“As a result of our investigation, the Office of the Missouri Attorney General has found no evidence that that [Planned Parenthood] has engaged in unlawful disposal of fetal organs and tissue,” a report concluded. Investigations in Georgia, Indiana, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania and South Dakota have cleared the group, as well, and a seventh has declined to even open investigations, citing lack of evidence.”
http://tinyurl.com/pxmbzch
And you and your sources are as full of crap as a Christmas goose. I condemned both heinous acts of violence…you continue to defend one. You can take your tinyurl and shove it.
Right – shooting up a clinic and killing civilians and a police officer is no different to you than performing an abortion – right? Both are equally “heinous’?
The topic of this particular thread are the illogical statements made by our Community Organizer in Chief. Now I fully understand that the resident progressive lefties who post here…would like to change the subject and talk about something else…but I would prefer to reiterate these words and thoughts from the copy:
“Nearly four centuries after the Mayflower set sail, the world is still full of pilgrims — men and women who want nothing more than the chance for a safer, better future for themselves and their families. What makes America America is that we offer that chance.” (President Obama)
“What is ironic is that liberals of his ilk have for years slandered the Pilgrims as rapacious, land-stealing, disease-spreading invaders who murdered the peaceful natives and foisted on the survivors their religion of conquest and slavery.
Comparisons can be taken to their logical or illogical, as the case may be, conclusions, depending on your view of history.” (Mr. Mitchell)
You really don’t see a difference between the guy who shot a police officer yesterday and a Planned Parenthood employee, do you?
Maybe this will clear it up for HFB a little; yes liberals, and others, have said, rightfully so I might add, that the Mayflower Pilgrams did steal land, spread disease, mirder peaceful inhabitants, and foist their religion on people. All true, and it’s also true that the Pilgrams, did seem to want nothing more than the chance for a safer, better future for themselves and their families. (Before they did all those other things obviously) and came to this land to do it.
So, it’s a little tough to get the point; President Obama was right about the Pilgrims, you were right about what liberals have said, and liberals have been right about what the Pilgrims did.
It’s a beautiful world where everyone being “right” doesn’t mean that everyone is just being dumb.
Yes I do…and I have clearly stated it as such. You’re little word games aside…and the fact that you choose to try and twist what was said, and ignore the PC approved violence (Dr. Gosnell, PP, etc) exposes your hypocrisy for what it is.
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/kelsey-grammer-infuriates-liberals-by-sporting-hard-core-pro-life-t-shirt-w
Sorry…that was for the little nyper. Patrick, you do know…that the settlers at Plymouth were not all religious people. Half of those on the Mayflower were soldiers, opportunists, and a myriad of other not so sterling folks. And what happened…at Plymouth and other areas of New England are not all black and white issues…and can’t always be neatly put into simple categories.
You think that the difference between yesterday’s terrorist incident and the daily activities at Planned Parenthood is that the latter are far, far more “heinous.” As you yourself wrote yesterday: “As heinous and misguided as this recent cowardly attack in Colorado was…it pales in comparison to what goes on at Planned Parenthood day in…and day out.”
“Pales in comparison”
This is the sort of thinking and language that leads to terrorism.
Only to sick twisted minds…such as the deranged shooter yesterday. And ostriches with their heads in the sand…that refuse to acknowledge that 327,000 little dismembered bodies are relevant.
HFB, it’s black and white according to the leader of the Pilgrims.
An excellent documentary by the way, taken mostly from Bradford’s personal diary (an interesting story in itself) that tells how the first Pilgrims (and not any soldiers, but instead the “faithful” stole property and land, spread disease, and killed by sword, many innocent natives.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/films/pilgrims/
You must have watched a different version than I did. I viewed that documentary twice this past week.
“You really don’t see a difference between the guy who shot a police officer yesterday and a Planned Parenthood employee, do you?”
That clears things up. Nyp (and his “ilk”) do not value the lives of private citizens at all.
I watched the version where, in one of their first acts, the Pilgrims stole corn put away by the Indians, killed chiefs and put their heads on a Pikes, stole Indian land and made it their own, desecrated Indian burial grounds, spread disease which resulted in over 90% of the native population dying! and brought multitudes of others over to hunt their game! steal other land! and kill other Indians; what did I miss?
“stole Indian land”
Wrong, tribe and individuals considered land something that could not be “owned”.
If you take something that cannot be owned and prevent others from using it, what term do you prefer to the word “stole”?
Facts are difficult things, natives had their beliefs and the foreigners had their own.
The two were going to conflict. The more powerful would come out on top. It’s just natural and you cannot assign a definition to something that was not an equal basis.
Guess to some people, apologists and revisionists, stealing from Indians didn’t count cause we were better at it than them. Based on this I guess,according to some people, since Buddists don’t believe that death is the end of life, killing them isn’t murder?
The native tribes did not believe in land ownership.
You cannot steal something which is not owned.
Guess to revisionists, any empire that expands is actually stealing the lands from those places it expands into. And even that is not a comparison of apples to apples.
With no human presence on Hawaii when the Micronesian and Polynesians first landed, they must have “stolen” that land from something?
Native’s on this continent didn’t believe in land ownership. Hence, it simply couldn’t be stolen. Or sold or borrowed.
Natives believed in property. And Buddists don’t believe in death.
“Facts are difficult things”
http://www.perc.org/articles/american-indian-collectivism
http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma5/viewdeath.html
As was, and still is true, no matter how twisted European notations of “property rights” are:
“Linklater points out that the native people, the Wampanaog, had allowed individual parcels of land to be used and occupied by individual families, but no one could have exclusive, permanent ownership of the land. As the Wampanaog leader Massasoit explained: ‘‘The land is our mother, nourishing all her children, beasts, birds, fish, and all men. The woods, the streams, everything on it belongs to everybody and is for the use of all. How can one man say it belongs only to him?’’
NO man, “owns” property with exclusive rights.
http://bollier.org/blog/fateful-choice-pilgrims-assign-private-property-rights-land
First of all…a good portion of the PBS version came from the writings of Edward Winslow. Second…most of the indian deaths from the plague had occurred before the Mayflower landed. TisSquantum, better known as Squanto of the Patuxet tribe – was the only known survivor of his people who had perished from the disease. And that is because he was kidnapped and taken back to England where he learned the language which he later used to interpret for the Pilgrims and the Wampanoag chief – Massasoit. (to be continued)
First nypatrick claims the land was “stolen”
Then nypatrick shows this was not possible.
nypatrick doesn’t know what to think. Typically, nypatrick tries to make others do the thinking, trying to force the conclusion to be the preconceived falsehoods nypatrick put forth from the start.
English slavers did set foot in America sometime prior to 1616 and did bring the plague to these shores, killing much of the native population and Squanto was taken as a slave and later escaped and returned to his country, oddly assisting the Pilgrims in their destruction. But, what remained of the population, after the initial disease spread by Europeans killed off a vast part of the population, what was left was killed off by other diseases (hepatitis) brought by the Mayflower Pilgrims.
But I doubt the fact that it was not the Pilgrims, but instead earlier slavers from England, that had doomed their population, gave the natives much joy.
You mean the Norwegian Vikings.
After all, the Vikings were the first Europeans to land on the “new world”….
I suppose anyone that thinks “shall” always means “must” (even when his failure is pointed out) ought not try to understand much of anything someone else tries to say.
Nypatrick defines failure.
shall
verb \shəl, ˈshal\
—used to say that something is expected to happen in the future
—used to ask for someone’s opinion
—used to give a command or to say that you will or will not allow something to happen
“What is SHALL?
As used in statutes and similar instruments, this word is generally imperative or mandatory; but it may be construed as merely permissive or directory, (as equivalent to “may,”) to carry out the legislative intention and In cases where no right or benefit to any one depends on its being taken in the imperative sense, and where no public or private right is impaired by its interpretation in the other sense. Also, as against the government, “shall” is to be construed as “may,” unless a contrary intention is manifest. See Wheeler v. Chicago, 24 111. 105, 76 Am. Dec. 736; People v. Chicago Sanitary Dist., 184 111. 597, 56 N. E. 9.”.:;: Madison v. Daley (C. C.) 58 Fed. 753; Cairo & F. R. Co. v. Ilecht, 95 U. S. 170, 24 L. Ed. 423. SHAM PLEA. See PLEA. SHARE 1082 SHERIFF
Law Dictionary: What is SHALL? definition of SHALL (Black’s Law Dictionary) “
Twisting words until they mean nothing is an art form created and perfected by lawyers.
Liar, lawyer. What’s the difference?
”The first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers,”
Nypatrick portrays themselves as lawyers….I’d be happy to make them adhere to meanings, not re-meanings.
More of what you missed of the PBS special on the Pilgrims (you should really watch the whole two hour program…and if you want a comprehensive view of the whole story, what they endured and the make up of the group, trials and tribulations, etc…you should take a peek at the four hour dramatization by National Geographic “Saints and Strangers” parts one and two…also taken directly from the writings of Winslow & Bradford). You would have learned that indeed…only half of the ships passengers were the religious separatists seeking relief from persecution, as it was illegal in England at that time to be a part of any church other than the church of England. This group fled England and were living in Holland for the decade before the voyage to the new land. The voyage of the Mayflower was a commercial venture…financed by a small group of private investors seeking a foothold in the new lands across the ocean. Thus it was this group of investors who secured and outfitted the ship, contracted with the separatists for safe passage, enlisted a number of former soldiers to provide security for the group, as well as tradesmen and other vagabonds who would be helpful in setting up a new community in the new land. The plan was to set up their village near what is present day New York City…but because of their late start and the poor condition of the ship and it’s crew…landed at what is Cape Cod Massachusetts. They landed there on November 11, 1620 at the start of winter…with no shelter, little food…having been decimated by 66 days at sea, in the hold of a stinking cargo ship. Half of the 102 passengers died that first winter.
HFB: the point was really not “who” the passengers were but rather what they did. Which was steal land, and property, kill innocents, spread disease, and bring others who did the same.
You asserted that it wasn’t “black and white” but so far you haven’t offered any mitigating circumstances for their theft, or murder.
When is this ever the case?
“In cases where no right or benefit to any one depends on its being taken in the imperative sense, and where no public or private right is impaired by its interpretation in the other sense.”
The point IS…and WAS…the whole story, not just twisted bits and pieces to suit your particular political societal bias. You claimed that the PBS documentary stated one thing…when in fact, it stated many things from many different view points.
Thomas, for purposes of my point in the past, specifically with regard to Nevada’s Constitution, the relevant part of the definition is:
“Also, as against the government, “shall” is to be construed as “may,” unless a contrary intention is manifest. See Wheeler v. Chicago, 24 111. 105, 76 Am. Dec. 736; People v. Chicago Sanitary Dist., 184 111. 597, 56 N. E. 9.”.:;: Madison v. Daley (C. C.) 58 Fed. 753; Cairo & F. R. Co. v. Ilecht, 95 U. S. 170, 24 L. Ed. 423. SHAM PLEA. See PLEA. SHARE 1082 SHERIFF”
The use of the phrase “which shall be sold” is not an imperative, but rather mean “which may be sold”.
The point HFB, as it was and is, is that the Pilgrims stole, killed, and eradicated by means of disease and otherwise, a native population.
You claimed that these actions weren’t so “black and white” implying that there might be excuses for the killing, stealing, and decimating, but as of now, you’ve offered only that some, or many, of the Pilgrims were unsavory types and perhaps not very religious.
Don’t know that that would carry much weight in any court I’m familiar with.
I implied no such thing. I merely point out that you continue to misstate the multi-faceted views contained in the documentary…which is obvious & apparent to anyone who actually watched it.
You conveniently leave out the fact that the Plymouth Colony made a pact, in fact a treaty with the Wampanoag tribe and it’s chief…Massasoit, not to harm each other…and to come to the aid of the other if some other tribe or group of settlers meant to do them harm. This was beneficial to the native Americans who were under siege by a more powerful tribe in the area, and was helpful to the colonists because the native Americans showed them how to survive. This pact lasted many years and runs counter to the “plunder and kill” scenario you try to paint.
You are ignoring the content of your own definition, Patrick.
No, nypatrick is changing the meaning of a word so it fits his wish.
The lawyerlie he cites does not apply as the US is not supposed to “own” any lands outside the borders of the District of Columbia.
Right – Yellowstone National Park is unconstitutional.
And Hoover Dam
As you are so fond of pointing out, those are places owned by “We The People”
We the People would like to stop squandering money on bureaucrats doing nothing but keeping people off the land and let the states see if they can profit from controlling/owning the land.
I didn’t ignore any relevant part of the definition Thomas.
For purposes of deciding questions relating to the Nevada Constitutions’ use of the word “shall” the relevant part of the definition is that one that applies to the government.
Because the Nevada Constitution doesn’t include any specific language requiring the word be construed in the imperative sense (such as stating the date by which the land must be sold) the language is to be interpreted as permissive.
Obviously you don’t like it, but I sure didn’t ignore anything.
Clearly “we the people” do NOT want our land sold. And speaking for my part of “we”, I agree.
Speaking for my part of “we” I like the openness and accessibility of the national parks.
This is not the case for that 85% of Nevada locked up by the feds. Open it up and you might see a change of opinion.
While we’re at it, lets also open up the landholdings of all people that own land in similar fashion that some seem to want to force other landowners to do.
Koch Bros., bush family, Reagan family etc.
Hear that?
it’s the sound goal posts make when being shoved around all over the place.