Obama Cannot Seem To

[Babe Ruth]

What egregious immoralities lead the list of US offenses?

Are they worse then Darfor? Or, the Sudan? Or the Terrorism between India and Pakistan? Or the ethnic cleansing in the Balkans? Or how many of the nations of South America turn a blind eye to the Drug Industry there and treat the heads of the drug Cartels as princes? How the child sex trade is tollerated in SE Asia?

No, they are not worse than other examples of man's inhumanity to man. Perhaps more hypocritical because of our bluff & bluster as we "spread democracy" by means of High Explosive.

Our egregious immorality is mostly related to the Dogs Of War that were unleashed in response to the events of 11 September. Mostly war crimes, such as institutionalized torture and rendition. Of course we give the goat herders of Central Asia their daily dose of murder and mayhem delivered by Predator Drones.

When 54% of american christians condone torture, it's safe to say that we've lost our moral bearings, eh?

[+and-then]

One thing is for certain... this will probably be the only TRUE thing that Obama can actually blame on 'Bush'

[+and-then]

No, they are not worse than other examples of man's inhumanity to man. Perhaps more hypocritical because of our bluff & bluster as we "spread democracy" by means of High Explosive.

Our egregious immorality is mostly related to the Dogs Of War that were unleashed in response to the events of 11 September. Mostly war crimes, such as institutionalized torture and rendition. Of course we give the goat herders of Central Asia their daily dose of murder and mayhem delivered by Predator Drones.

When 54% of american christians condone torture, it's safe to say that we've lost our moral bearings, eh?

Had 911 not occurred we Americans would be quite happy to have left the "goat herders" alone. I get sick of people spitting on my country while they live here...blaming the world's woes on anything but their own actions. Here's a clue for ya Babe - don't attack the US and we'll leave your country alone, deal?

[eqgumby]

Yes there is a morals clause in their contract!!

Is there? Any sources, or links to what a Secret Service agents contract looks like? I'm curious to see what they actually have for terms of employment.

[ninjadude]

Because these are people who are supposed to be professionals, with decades of experience. They are hired by the government based on their professionalism.

So professionals can't be immoral? Professionals have higher morals than others? Professionals hare supposed to have higher morals?

These are mistaken impressions. There is nothing whatsoever to do with morals.

Definition of PROFESSIONALISM

1 : the conduct, aims, or qualities that characterize or mark a profession or a professional person(see ¹professional) 2 : the following of a profession (as athletics) for gain or livelihood

Profession

a : a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and intensive academic preparation b : a principal calling, vocation, or employment

[ninjadude]

You're talking politics. And democrat politicians are just as corrupt. Bill Clinton and Monica? Whitewater? John Edwards? The Kennedys? Chicago and Illinois? Gov Blagojevich? For every GOP corruption story, there is just as many Democrat instances of corruption.

Corruption refers to monetary remuneration. Lewinsky was an affair. Whitewater was about illegality related to Clinton's land deal by others - not corruption - none was proven against the Clintons. Edwards was an affair. I have no idea what the "Kennedys" refers to - maybe affairs from 50 years ago - again not corruption. Chicago? Illinois governor Blago is a real example of corruption as he tried to sell Obama's senate seat.

You need to re-evaluate what corruption means.

Political corruption is the abuse of public power, office, or resources by elected government officials for personal gain, e.g. by extortion, soliciting or offering bribes^[2] It can also take the form of office holders maintaining themselves in office by purchasing votes by enacting laws which use taxpayer money.

My link

[ninjadude]

Yes there is a morals clause in their contract!!

Then they are in big trouble. Do you have a source for this?

[ShadowSot]

Had 911 not occurred we Americans would be quite happy to have left the "goat herders" alone. I get sick of people spitting on my country while they live here...blaming the world's woes on anything but their own actions. Here's a clue for ya Babe - don't attack the US and we'll leave your country alone, deal?

The attack came out of actions the US took in the Middle East. Unlike in the US, people overseas have long memories.

And of course, this ignores that the US went after Iraq, which was the wrong country.

But hey, oil.

[Babe Ruth]

Had 911 not occurred we Americans would be quite happy to have left the "goat herders" alone. I get sick of people spitting on my country while they live here...blaming the world's woes on anything but their own actions. Here's a clue for ya Babe - don't attack the US and we'll leave your country alone, deal?

Yikes!

You mean we were attacked by Pakistani goat herders? You must be really in tune with cause and effect in global politics! Wow.

All this time I thought we had been attacked by arab camel jockeys with box cutters!

Edited April 18, 2012 by Babe Ruth

[Marks_Thoughts]

Secret service men charged with misconduct,and dismissed from their posts in South America.

http://www.newser.com/story/144071/secret-service-felled-when-agent-didnt-pay-hooker.html

lol lol lol

The activity was legal in Colombia, but it certainly is against all common sense, code of conduct rules, and policies of the agency. The same is true for the military men involved as well. What it suggests, unproven at this point, is a 'culture' of behavior within the larger group. This means there are two bigger questions to ask beyond the facts of the cases against the individuals involved. One is whether the behavior exists within only the smaller group of agents and soldiers who travel ahead of the president for security, or is the behavior accepted beyond that group to include more of the agency members? The second question to answer is at what level does knowledge of similar or previous behavior rise to? In short, how wide-spread is the acceptance of such behavior and second, how high within the agency does the knowledge or acceptance of this behavior rise?

My belief is that an agency or organization is not going to see as many people involved in such activities if it has not been ignored or even condoned by superiors previously. The reason I say this is that most would never see themselves taking part in something like this as individuals, it requires some peer acceptance or pressure to those who have been indoctrinated and trained in correct behavior. It would likely be just a single individual making a poor decision as the more likely scenario in most cases. Here, it is not. You have 21 or more men taking part in something that is clearly against policy and which is clearly dangerous on many levels. There must be a lot more to this story we have not heard, and may never hear if the media does not pursue with diligence.

[Marks_Thoughts]

Secret service men charged with misconduct,and dismissed from their posts in South America.

http://www.newser.com/story/144071/secret-service-felled-when-agent-didnt-pay-hooker.html

lol lol lol

The activity was legal in Colombia, but it certainly is against all common sense, code of conduct rules, and policies of the agency. The same is true for the military men involved as well. What it suggests, unproven at this point, is a 'culture' of behavior within the larger group. This means there are two bigger questions to ask beyond the facts of the cases against the individuals involved. One is whether the behavior exists within only the smaller group of agents and soldiers who travel ahead of the president for security, or is the behavior accepted beyond that group to include more of the agency members? The second question to answer is at what level does knowledge of similar or previous behavior rise to? In short, how wide-spread is the acceptance of such behavior and second, how high within the agency does the knowledge or acceptance of this behavior rise?

My belief is that an agency or organization is not going to see as many people involved in such activities if it has not been ignored or even condoned by superiors previously. The reason I say this is that most would never see themselves taking part in something like this as individuals, it requires some peer acceptance or pressure to those who have been indoctrinated and trained in correct behavior. It would likely be just a single individual making a poor decision as the more likely scenario in most cases. Here, it is not. You have 21 or more men taking part in something that is clearly against policy and which is clearly dangerous on many levels. There must be a lot more to this story we have not heard, and may never hear if the media does not pursue with diligence.

[hopper]

It seems the Secret Service can't keep the secret of them getting serviced.

[Simbi Laveau]

And ya KNEW this was coming..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/26/secret-service-scandal-prostitution-el-salvador_n_1455343.html?ir=World