Posted on 11/10/2008 1:56:26 PM PST by pissant
WASHINGTON (Map, News) - A Republican congressman from Georgia is calling President-elect Obama a Marxist and warning that he might be planning to form a Gestapo-like security force so he can rule as a dictator.
Two-term Rep. Paul Broun of Athens cited a July speech that has circulated on the Internet in which Obama called for a civilian force to take some of the national security burden off the military.
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
Wait until Obama does or says something
__________________
He already has...no need to wait.
I’m a huge fan of this man and I only know his name 10 minutes!
I think that’s a great start. I’m not at all familiar with the chapters or how they work. Is there a way to organize or get the ball rolling?
10 years! A Klinton supporter gone mad or a hacker.
bet K
I think that’s a great start. I’m not at all familiar with the chapters or how they work. Is there a way to organize or get the ball rolling?
BINGO.
PS. have not seen you for ages.
Somewhere along the line he drank the kool-aid would be my guess.
“then he must be forced to listen to NPR!”
In my 71 years i’ve never found NPR on a radio!
Impeach Obama websites were bought up long ago.
Very good post!
What about last week, last month, last year and everything in between?
It’s too late to defeat this guy by (correctly) defining him as an unacceptable radical-socialist/marxist - he was elected President.
Now the Republicans are stuck waiting for him to make a mistake - so they can pounce.
Trying the “red scare” too little too late is the Republicans making a mistake.
Paul Broun looks like a great leader, we need to stand behind him - he has GOODNESS and COURAGE which are in such short supply in our elected leaders these days!
http://video1.washingtontimes.com/fishwrap/2007/07/georgia_election_bad_news_for_1.html
Founding president of the Georgia Republican Assembly. Life Member of the NRA and President of its state affiliate, the Georgia Sport Shooting Association. Member, Gun Owners of America.
Nor does Dr. Broun’s campaign platform suggest good news for liberals:
Restore Constitutional Government
End the Federal Income Tax & Abolish the IRS
Secure our borders. Stop the Invasion of Illegal Aliens.
Support our Troops. Win the War on Terrorists.
Protect Private Property Rights
Stop the ACLU and Activist Federal Judges from Destroying America’s Heritage of Religious Freedom and Religious Expression.
I just explained to you with a laundry list of why the GOP was ineffective. Time to take off the gloves.
I’ve always wanted to move to Georgia..
I tried to email him to show my support, but his web site won't let you enter an address other than Georgia, so I couldn't send it on. I'm going to try to call tomorrow.
IATZ, post 33
pissant wrote: “The problem with the “friend of radicals” attacks from the GOP was:
A) They were sporadic at best.
B) They did not tie it into a larger narrrative
c) McCain and the RNC jumped down other GOP groups’ throats for running Rev. Wright ads...”
Absolutely right!
But the problem was that McCain took Wright off the table. If you want to make the case that Obama has close associations with America-hating scumbags, and Wright is off the table... it doesn’t make any sense.
People would not buy the presentation that friendship with Ayers was a huge problem, but Wright wasn’t worth mentioning.
What price popularity?
Share Post PrintNovember 8, 2008 Posted by Paul at 10:16 PM
Other than the racial angle, the thing that has Barack Obama’s supporters most excited is the prospect that, thanks to ascension, America will once more be liked and respected around the world. Those aroused by this prospect can be divided into two categories. The first are the folks who believe, with the naivety only a certain type of liberal can possess, that a gesture (the election of Obama) can transform, lastingly and without cost, the way the world views us. These people are fools.
The second category are those who believe that Obama will take substantive positions that please foreigners and that, in particular, he will back measures that limit U.S. sovereignty. These people are on to something.
In the November 17 issue of the National Review (not available online to my knowledge), John Fonte of the Hudson Institute identifies four “transnational power grabs” that Obama is likely to push for They are: the Law of the Sea Treaty, the Rights of the Child Treaty, the Convention for the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), and the International Criminal Court. Agreement by the U.S. to these arrangements would make us more popular with foreigners, but only at a cost to our national security, our right of self-governance, and our rights under the Constitution.
As Fonte explains, the Law of the Sea Treaty could result in maritime disputes involving U.S. defense forces being arbitrated by an international panel composed of 21 judges, some of whom would be chosen by the likes of China, Russia, and Cuba. The Rights of the Child Treaty would require uniform penal codes for minors in all 50 states. It would abolish the death penalty and life imprisonment for everyone under the age of 18. And it would limit parental rights, for example by granting children the legal right to correspond with anyone, anywhere, without interference from their parents.
According to Fonte, CEDAW would likely result in the imposition of gender-based preferences in multiple spheres, including elective offices. He says the U.N. committee that monitors compliance with CEDAW has called on the Republic of Georgia to return to its Communist-era policy of gender quotas in public offices. Britain has be told to adopt the “comparable worth” standard of “equal pay” under which bureaucrats set pay rates. Fonte also warns that CEDAW would provide a method for “overturning a vast array of federal and state laws that [feminists] do not have the votes to defeat through democratic means.”
The ICC, according to Obama foreign-policy advisor Sarah Sewall, “represents an acid test for America’s commitment to international and universal concepts of justice and human rights.” The problem is that under the ICC American soldiers could be charged with war crimes and tried by a court comprised of judges whose interests and values are foreign to our own. Thus, the ICC is indeed an acid test. . .of our commitment to national sovereignty and self-governance.
Fonte points to a Harris poll taken for the Bradley Foundation in which by a margin of 63 percent to 16 percent, Americans said they see the U.S. Constitution, not international law, as the highest legal authority for Americans. 83 percent think of themselves as U.S. citizens, rather than citizens of the world.
To Obama, these views may signify a bitter population clinging to archaic concepts. But they also signify a challenge. To achieve what I take to be his transnationalist agenda, and to ensure our popularity among foreigners, Obama will have to risk some of his popularity among Americans.
Yeah, Broun should have run for President.
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.