Obama Urges Americans To Give Up Liberty For Security

a reply to: darkuniverse

Absolutely zero surprise there. Moving forward we will continue to see a push for more security at the expense of liberties - it's the new fad!

What liberties did Mr. Obama suggest we give up again?

I don't find that in the speech.

Transcript of Obama's speech to the UN

a reply to: DBCowboy
well said beer on me..

At what point does Obama say Americans should "Give up liberty for security"?

originally posted by: xuenchen
Obama is extremely dangerous right now.

Watch out for wild regulations and some E.O.s before Jan 20th.

He will makes things as difficult as possible for the next President regardless of who it is.

Ha! Maybe he'll remove the T keys from all the keyboards and leave the WH "broke as feck".

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: darkuniverse

No.

Globalists and Obama can kiss my ass.

Another example of the dictatorship of Obama and Hillary:

The president has the power to “shape our children,” Hillary Clinton said in a controversial tweet that sparked outrage among parents.

“As [Michelle Obama] said, the choice in this election is about who will have the power to shape our children for the next four years of their lives,” Hillary declared.

That’s something Hugo Chavez or another third-world dictator would say.

Clinton’s Orwellian notion that the government should take more control from parents to raise the nation’s children has been promoted by the authoritarian left before, perhaps most famously by former MSNBC host Melissa Harris-Perry in 2013.

“We have to break through our private idea that kids belong to their parents or kids belong to their families,” she said, adding that kids belong “to whole communities” instead.

More recently, Black Lives Matter vowed to destroy the nuclear family and replace it with communitarian-style collective parenting.

“We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and ‘villages’ that collectively care for one another, and especially ‘our’ children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable,” states BlackLivesMatter.com on its “guiding principles” page.

And the notion that children should worship the president gained momentum during the Obama administration.

For example, school teachers in Las Vegas, Nev., forced students to pledge allegiance to a huge, projected image of the president instead of the U.S. flag.

“Anyone in their right mind will realize that Americans are not supposed to ‘pledge allegiance’ or ‘service’ to a president,” Steve Watson pointed out. “The U.S. Constitution, that piece of paper that Obama clumsily swore to defend and protect, states quite clearly that elected representatives are supposed to act in ‘service’ of the people’s best interests, not the other way around.”

Similarly, when Obama began his presidency, entertainment celebrities pledged their servitude to the president.

“The Presidential Pledge is a platform for people across the nation and throughout the world to make a first person commitment of service to our new President, articulating a specific intent or action to become an agent of positive change,” actor Ashton Kutcher said.

NBC's propaganda:

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: Gryphon66
What liberties did Mr. Obama suggest we give up again?

I don't find that in the speech.

Transcript of Obama's speech to the UN

Self determination for one...

And we can only realize the promise of this institution’s founding [ED NOTE: the UN] — to replace the ravages of war with cooperation — if powerful nations like my own accept constraints. Sometimes I’m criticized in my own country for professing a belief in international norms and multilateral institutions. But I am convinced that in the long run, giving up some freedom of action — not giving up our ability to protect ourselves or pursue our core interests, but binding ourselves to international rules over the long term — enhances our security.

Globalists, by definition, won't respect the sovereign laws of any given nation.

It is Imperialism writ large.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
What liberties did Mr. Obama suggest we give up again?

I don't find that in the speech.

Transcript of Obama's speech to the UN

Sometimes I’m criticized in my own country for professing a belief in international norms and multilateral institutions. But I am convinced that in the long run, giving up some freedom of action — not giving up our ability to protect ourselves or pursue our core interests, but binding ourselves to international rules over the long term — enhances our security.

Is that enough for you?

Oh and since you posted the speech, I would like for just once this guy put his money where his mouth is............

And in my own life, in this country, and as President, I have learned that our identities do not have to be defined by putting someone else down, but can be enhanced by lifting somebody else up. They don’t have to be defined in opposition to others, but rather by a belief in liberty and equality and justice and fairness.

Yeah from the same guy that said this.....cause you know he is a real uniter.

And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

a reply to: shooterbrody

That quote doesn't say anything about Americans giving up liberties.

Obama. I remember when I used to think that GWB was creepy but Obama puts Bush to shame in that department. The man defines the word. We could build an entire new dictionary around Obama, starting with the word "Creepy". It needs no more than one word to define it. Obama. LOL

Obama is a very dangerous man.

Could Obama Run For A Third Term?

Obama said he could win a third term if he ran, but that he is precluded by U.S. law, and does not want to do it anyway.

The talk triggered recollections of topics ranging from amnesty to health care to gay marriage, on which Obama made comments that turned out to have a short shelf-life, and raised the question of what would happen if he did seek a third term
The nature of the actual legal barriers to a third term is an interesting one, and is examined at Real Clear Policy in
These barriers are surprisingly flimsy, primarily because of the odd wording of Amendment XXII, which says “No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice . . . .”

As discussed in RCP, this leaves open the possibility that a former President could resume the Presidency by a non-elected route. He might be elected Vice President, for example, or become a cabinet member and then ascend via the Presidential Succession Act. This is not an outlandish possibility; it was raised seriously in 1959 at the end of Eisenhower’s term.

Its a old story from last year, but it goes to show his ego is like a king.

link:www.whitehouse.gov...








..

a reply to: BrianFlanders
good one, definitely true.

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: darkuniverse

Ha, Obama believes in a New World order!
Guess he's a conspiracy buff now too.

Give me liberty, or give me death!

You are like me. You've read the book with the glorious age of man ushering a new world order, and we know how that all works out for us. In the very end it goes well, but not for a whole lot of folks.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: shooterbrody

That quote doesn't say anything about Americans giving up liberties.

Giving up our sovereingty is ceding our liberties.

a reply to: ScepticScot

So "binding ourselves to international rules over the long term" is all aver the constitution?

We fought a revolution to unbind ourselves from the international rules at that time. Don't think we want to have to do that again.

a reply to: ketsuko
I served my country, I love my America, I will fight for her, her liberties, protect her from foreign and DOMESTIC enemies. Even though I'm a veteran now, my oath still stands.

a reply to: ketsuko

America following international law is americans giving up their liberties?

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: ScepticScot

So "binding ourselves to international rules over the long term" is all aver the constitution?

We fought a revolution to unbind ourselves from the international rules at that time. Don't think we want to have to do that again.

Where in the US constitution does it prohibit international treaties?