“Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with all thy might; for there is no work, nor device, nor knowledge, nor wisdom, in the grave, whither thou goest… Sow your seed in the morning, and at evening let not your hands be idle, for you do not know which will succeed, whether this or that, or whether both will do equally well.”

Or as grampa used to say “Well, now we’re just talking about it.”

I think it’s more a product of wanting to think about each and every word before he opens his mouth in public, to ensure that he never says anything without it coming out exactly as he means it.

In a private intimate setting, his barriers are a lot lower.

When you focus on the world at large — fed to you by whatever news source you prefer and your favorite Internet sources — you start to believe that there is something that your country can do to change things. This is inherently false. You can change things. YOU. But you have to stop focusing on the world “out there” and zoom in on your world. There have been, and will always be, situations outside of your direct experience that you have no control over. The key thing to remember here, is YOU HAVE NO CONTROL over them, so stop thinking that you do. But you DO have control over your own experience, your own small corner of the world.

This doesn’t mean that you should be tilting at windmills in your own neighborhood, but starting even smaller, with YOURSELF first, then expressing that compassion and kindness to those people who you interact with. Many people will scoff at this, but one person, getting him or herself into a positive state of mind and emotion will have an incredible influence upon the world. As the line from that Elvis song goes, “Clean up your own backyard.”

The other key point is that the more you rail *against* something, the more you’ll notice that thing you don’t want showing up in your life. Your attention to it will see to that. So be “for” something instead. Trust me, it’ll get you a lot farther.

I don’t care about killing bad people who happen to have been born in America with a drone strike, even though its illegal. Go ahead. It’s what I’d do.

I do care about killing uninvolved people. Thats unconscionable. If you can’t kill em without killing random people, stop.. and find a way to kill them cleanly. Perhaps an itty bitty drone.

a : of common quality, rank, or ability

b : deficient in quality : poor, inferior

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ordinary

Sometimes a happy tear is just a happy tear.

Daaaayummmmm… burn. Also, true story. Thank you Xeni.

What’s happening to the economy is bad and the worst is probably yet to come, the drone strikes are a fucking crime, Obama has a lot more he should answer for; but Romney would be far, far, _far_ worse on every count.

And by “not having any problem” I mean they would not be prosecuted or punished in any way.

Abdulrahman al-Awlaki, Anwar al-Awlaki, and Samir Khan were all American citizens… but according to Eric Holder, “Some have argued that the president is required to get permission from a federal court before taking action against a United States citizen [...] this is simply not accurate. ‘Due process’ and ‘judicial process’ are not one and the same, particularly when it comes to national security. The Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process.”

And who decides what “due process” is?  According to Holder, the President does.  So, in other words, in the opinion of the administration, as long as he thinks about it real hard for a few minutes, it’s completely legal for any US President to have anyone murdered out of hand.  It’s not like you have to be provably active in a military action or anything, you can be watching “Golden Girls” in your living room.  He just has to decide you’re probably a terrurrist, and he doesn’t have to actually prove anything at all to anyone.

I think that it’s entirely possible to consider the fact that he’s a damn fine human being with a genuine heart

Sure but it is also possible that he is a good actor.

But you know, if the G.O.P ran a conservative republican Republican in an election, I would vote for that person.  Unfortunately the party only runs pro-corporate ultra-radicals who are primarily guided by unreasoning faith in all sorts of loopy things that have nothing to do with republicanism or conservation.  In fact most of their beliefs seem to involve invisible sky-daddies, consolidation of power and wealth into fewer hands, organized mayhem in foreign lands, and hate-mongering against imaginary threats to the union (like gays, liberals, and atheists, for example).  They all detest the idea of conservation of natural resources and are unwilling to practice any sort of fiscal responsibility, so I can’t honestly consider any of them conservatives, and they always side with giant multinational corporations over states and communities, so I can’t consider them republicans either.

In the meantime, I’m proud to say that I voted against George W. Bush four times, which is the most anyone could do without actually moving to Texas.

How many of those people detest Obama’s policies, but held their nose and voted because they were afraid of what might happen if they didn’t?

From the perspective of wanting human rights for everybody? Ten, maybe twelve.

Mocking him for his use of drones in relation to this video is a cheap shot.

A cheap shot? Monumental unintentional irony when discussing Obama conducting a campaign versus innocent people being murdered from the sky.

From that point of view, I don’t much care that one or the other leader was elected, except that I think Obama is more intelligent and at least smart enough to make some of the decisions that will keep our global economy from total collapse for a few years.  Romney would have accelerated that disaster.  They have both consumed amounts of the Kool-Aid, however, it’s more  matter of scale.

To oppose the targeting first responders and funerals and villages where suspected anti-American insurgents might be residing is not “pacifism.” It’s human decency.

There are lots of folks in the military who clearly oppose Obama’s tactics and lots of evidence that it’s making us less safe. Pretending that opposing these policies is to hope for a “total pacifist as POTUS,” is dishonest.