Obama_Quietly_Revokes_His_Plan_for_a_Draft
P.S. people who support Obama are what Moochers and should be referred to as such.
Posted on 11/07/2008 10:40:35 AM PST by Traviswf
They have no need to form partnerships with Conservatives.
They will allow Republicans a voice only in instances where they'll need saps to share the blame.
Compromise isn't in their playbook, and it shouldn't be in ours.
Obama_Quietly_Revokes_His_Plan_for_a_Draft
P.S. people who support Obama are what Moochers and should be referred to as such.
at least it holds the crime rate down.
Absolutely, and in a nanosecond;
Opie already has the loot, she is firmly entrenched in the liberal pantheon, (like Obama himself) she is insulated by her race, and she is convinced that she is one of the elite who will stand above the masses.
Besides, her strong position as a leading light to the 'nothing better to do this afternoon' crowd will make her useful for some time to come.
What she probably fails to see, acting on feelings rather than knowledge or deduction, is that the fellow travelers, Mensheviks and other lesser socialists, can be sacrificed at any time for the same 'greater good' they were working to bring about.
I see Bambi himself as a Menshevik;
One of the things I intend to watch is who will prove to be the heir when our newly elected Dear President is himself tossed under the bus.
Note: I'm late here, missed the post until this AM. Glad you chose to raise the discussion. Stick around and perthaps gain some perspective, then please share it with my neighbors.
It may interest you to know that Howard Dean lost the Iowa caucuses when he came back hard to a citizen at a town meeting that questioned his tone with "Bush is not my neighbor!" Many Iowans got off the Dean bandwagon and voted for "Kerry" whom many knew as that nice Senator from Nebraska (Bob). John Kerry was an accidental candidate. Momentum trumps policy.
Assuming that you understand the U.S. Constitution and the purposes of the Judicial Branch, you should not have the slightest problem with justices who seek to uphold the Constitution and not usurp the functions of the Legislative Branch.
In other words, why do you want a bunch of judges who think they can legislate? It would be just as bad if they were conservative judges who wanted to legislate from the bench. It subverts the system of government.
Blah, blah, blah. Liberals: it takes you guys 10K words to get to the same place a sane person could get to in two. Should be a fun 4 years. Blah, blah, blah.
From your source;
“DO YOU PEOPLE OUT THERE HAVE ANY NOTION OF THE PESTILENCE YOU HAVE CALLED UPON OUR HEADS?”
No, they are too dim and uninformed. Although my city is overwhelmingly Republican, my newspaper publishes comments every day from those enthralled that Obama was elected.
I saved a comment that a Freeper wrote as sarcasm, and it describes many of the Obama supporters;
“I’m so excited I’m going to cash out, ‘retire’, become disabled and go on SSI and welfare, complain, whine about my fair share, join the AARP and become a Democrat.”
Two babies die every minute. There goes your crime rate
Does that mean Bush voters should also feel betrayed for voting for a socialist? Bush’s rushed economic package - supported by good sized portions of republicans and democrats in congress - includes lots of government intervention into the markets.
There is nothing in this definition of communism you’re posting that has anything to do with any of Obama’s proposals. They do have more to do with Bush’s recent action taken with the banks and other financial institutions. Although I believe these were - as everyone has said - action taken during a financial crisis, and not an intended step towards government control over the market.
And doesn’t “collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods” apply to certain parts of our government? Once money comes into the government from income taxes - it’s a redistribution of wealth into programs, goods and services that are government or “collectively” owned.
Is there something else that Obama is doing that is an egregious escalation of socialist philosophy that stands in direct conflict with American capitalism?
I have replied to someone else about the “Civilian security force” in another post that maybe you didn’t see.
The only evidence I’ve seen of a security force on right wing blogs are this Youtube clip that has Obama referring to a defense force at home. I believe, in that speech, he’s talking about more money for cops and firefighters - because they are first responders in a 9/11 or Katrina like scenario.
The other part of his plan is organizing volunteer to respond to emergency situations, filling in a gap that was noticeable, and everyone has talked about, during Katrina (and 9/11). People want to help - but there’s no organization for bringing in those people and sending them where they are most needed.
Then there is the call for volunteering in expanded Americorps and Peace Corps, which young people can do for college tuition.
I’m not seeing anything resembling a gestapo like civilian security force in there, nor the potential for one. If you’ve ever run across a group of kids working for Americorps - you’ll know how benign they are.
I voted no on Prop 8 and viewed it as a devastating loss. As someone who has been married for 7 years, I’ve never felt “threatened” by gay marriage. I have gay friends, gay colleagues and gay acquaintances who have very strong relationships and families. Some of them got married before the Proposition passed, and thankfully they can stay married. I believe they deserve every right I have under the law, including the term “marriage.”
There was a fear among some that without Prop 8, churches would be forced to marry gay couples - and that was false. The other worry was that gay marriage would be taught in schools - which I understand some people having trouble with and I think that will a compromise in new language next year.
Every side has their embarrassments.
Can you show me a link where there is evidence of this “25,000 person police force with the power of the US Army” ?
They already do.
LOL, you need to read a little more around here.
And your "hope" and "change" president just gave the chief of staff job to Rahm Embarrassment.
That's not "hope" or "change" but more of the same liberal crap. Watch - if he makes Gorelick AG it will look like the bench team for a 3rd term of Clinton. But this time, they'll do the things they really wanted to do back then but didn't have the power or the puppet to get them done (Fairness (Censorship) Doctrine, Card Check, bailout to a bailout....) Your side has lied, cheated and stole everything they wanted - THEN pitched a infantile hissy fit when you didn't get your way. Well guess what, you've got it now. And with that responsibility comes the same level of criticism your party has waged at our troops, our President, our schools, our churches, our small businesses, and our patriotic way of life. You want to kiss and make up meanwhile your party is waging a war against the Mormon Church for Prop 8. If you had a shred of decency, you would speak out against them for this. Or didn't you drive to southern California on your post 9/11 journey? Go sell your hugs somewhere else. I'm not buying.
I cannot make you smart and rational.
If you can read my post and everybody else’s posts here on this thread, and still respond with such willing ignorance, I’m not going to wast my time going into detail on how you are so wrong.
Your folly has been refuted on this thread many times.
Perl’s before swine.
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.