Georgia congressman warns of Obama dictatorship

reply to post by ORIPEIA


For clarification, what paragraph has been misconstrued, who is the angry republican, and what good is contacting representatives going to do when it apparently didn't help with anything Bush has done.

You're entitled to your opinion, as is everyone here, but it is better to nip potentially dangerous proposals in the bud than to let them go and just wait to see what happens. Perhaps we wouldn't be where we are today if some of Bush's policies and orders had been nipped in the bud.

Originally posted by ClintK

Originally posted by Clearskies

You mean, like the banks, housing markets, because we may be on our way and Mao didn't start seizing private property until he had already been there awhile.
I heard Donald Trump this morning and he said there would probably only be 3 banks in the future.

In the first place, Obama didn't have anything to do with that. In the second, it's unlikely the government is going to "seize" any banks. No bank is being forced to accept bail-out money against its will, and the government isn't buying the bank, it's buying packages of assets the bank can't unload anywhere else.

Finally, the government can't possibly seize the housing "market."

The comparison to Mao is ridiculous.

Obama had nothing to do with that?? Did he just not show up for the vote on the Bail Out Bill? Ohhh may fault, he was there and voted for it. So I guess I can honestly say, Yes he did have something to do with it.

reply to post by maybereal11


If they SIMPLY 'cut the pork-barrel spending', we would HAVE the funds for infrastructure instead of another governmental program.

reply to post by maybereal11


Except that everything was starting to fall apart well before this war started (pick one), they have been working on an interstate not far from me for over 15 years now. I think it stands to reason that road isn't falling apart due to a war. The bridges that have been falling, haven't been touched in decades for anything more than the occasional coat of paint. Once again, started before the war. I cannot leave my house without seeing construction and repairs going on everywhere whether it is on houses, streets, bridges, etc. So I don't for one second buy that we don't have the people already working on rebuilding what needs to be fixed.

The solution to getting all the roads and bridges fixed has nothing to do with a Civilian Security Force and everything to do with getting the people who own the companies actually doing the repairs to get their butts in gear and finish them already instead of taking their sweet time to get more money for the job.

And again I ask. What is postwar supposed to mean? Last I checked the war is still going. We aren't post anything, least of all a war.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Socialism is the middle ground between communism and capitalism.

In Marxist theory, socialism is the intermediate system between capitalism and communism, when the government is in the process of changing the means of ownership from privatism, to collective ownership.[5][6]

EVERY communist resource I've looked at says that socialism is the final intermediate, just before communism is rolled out.

reply to post by Clearskies


Obama isn't even a socialist, so I find it hard to care whether it is a medium or not.

He might concur with socialized health care, but so do many other capitalist countries across the globe.

reply to post by Jenna


The U.S. never OFFICIALLY declared a war on anyone except the vague, apparition of 'terrorism'. Thus, bypassing the protocols of law.

Originally posted by MrWendal

Obama had nothing to do with that?? Did he just not show up for the vote on the Bail Out Bill? Ohhh may fault, he was there and voted for it. So I guess I can honestly say, Yes he did have something to do with it.

No, Obama had nothing to do with the bank failures and the bursting of the housing market bubble.

reply to post by Clearskies


True, but lack of declaration does not change the fact that we have been fighting in wars for 7 years now.

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by Clearskies

 

Obama isn't even a socialist, so I find it hard to care whether it is a medium or not.

I didn't say 'socialist'. Take a hard look at my thread, please; www.abovetopsecret.com...'

[edit on 11-11-2008 by Clearskies]

reply to post by Jenna




1. The one citing Obama's call for a Civilian Security Force.
2. The Republican in your quoted opening paragraph.

I'm sorry, I just can't live my life in fear of anything. I'd rather have hope for a more promising tommorrow with our "human civilization" taking that next step towards type 1 status then to concern myself with antiquated governmental constructs that may never come to fruition. While I don't agree with your assertions, I do respect your opinion and concerns.

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
The neo-conservative fascists hiding within the republican party are facing a no-win situation and they realise the end is near. So what do they do? They try a smear campaign with "I fear he is a communist supporter" as though they even have a clue what communism is. I guess they don't teach political science in high school anymore, do they?

America has gone so far right in the last decade that even a push to the center will likely be viewed as socialistic reform. That is how bad things have gotten under Bush/Cheney. I thank god for leaving america several years ago but it seems corruption and greed are spreading to europe as well.

Things have been going further left. There has been absolutely NO move further to the right. Bush has moved away from the right with left wing agendas like big government spending

reply to post by maybereal11



You will never get an argument from me about how money needs to be spent at home and how are infrastructure is literally falling apart. I agree completely.

Don't you think we would have that money if you were not so busy investing in building the empire? We had the money to go to Iraq and occupy someone else's home. We had the money to buy bad debt off the books of banks who loaned that money out to begin with to people whom they knew could never pay it back. Speaking of which... wasn't that money supposed to go to the banks so they could continue to give us the privilege of loaning us more money at interest? And where is that money now??

Fact is we would have that money to fix our infrastructure if we were not so busy funding the Empire of the USA.

And please someone tell me how that is all Bush's fault and it is because he is a Republican, because I would like to remind you that Bush ran on a platform that he would reduce the size of Government and bring our troops home from around the world, which is typically what Republican always say, but just cause Bush said it, didn't make it so. So it does not make me a racist when I say... The proof is in the pudding. I do not trust Obama as far as I could throw him and just cause he says it, doesn't make it so. I really hope someone has made a list of all his promises of what he will do as President... cause after 4 years I can assure you, he would have shown himself to do what every other Candidate has done.... make empty promises to get into Office and then do what he wants.

Of course I am sure he will live up to some of his promises. Like his plan for Brownshirts..errrr... I mean a Civilian Security Force which consist of Aid Workers, Ameri Corps, Community Service workers and leaders, Peace Corps and Diplomats Let's just ignore the facts that they have nothing to do with "security" and that they must be created even though they already exist

reply to post by Clearskies


You wrote a lot about people near Obama in that post (including a guy who Obama didn't really know - his father), however, I did take notice that not one quote was from Barack Obama himself.

Weird.

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
reply to post by Clearskies

 

You wrote a lot about people near Obama in that post (including a guy who Obama didn't really know - his father), however, I did take notice that not one quote was from Barack Obama himself.

Weird.

Really? then you didn't look over it, but casually.
Did you see my quotes from his book Dreams from My Father?
I have to wonder, which father, Lenin?

reply to post by Clearskies


I see, the quotes further down on the first page (I only read the OP).

Anyway, none of the first 5 I read proved anything. Haven't gone any further. Do you have an quotes of his that he states he plans to turn this country socialist?

You do realize that there is a socialist party and that the socialist party even agrees that Obama is not socialist?

Originally posted by MrWendal
Using your logic and ideology... if these "neo-conservative fascist" are capable of injecting and hiding within the Republican Party, what makes you think they do not exist, or are not capable of doing the same, within the Democratic Party on some level as well?

How can neo-conservative facists hide in the democratic party? They hate the democratic party and they even hate the traditional conservatives.

Your arguement is ABSURD!

Originally posted by Irish M1ck
You do realize that there is a socialist party and that the socialist party even agrees that Obama is not socialist?

Link, please.
But, I didn't ask if he was socialist on my thread.

No time to read the thread, sorry if this has already been posted. I found this when this crazy right winger I know went off about this after hearing Michael Savage talk about it. This settled him down. Here is a link to Obama's defense plan:

www.barackobama.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">LINK!!!

Here is the relevant text relating to his Civilian Assistance Corps:

• Create a Civilian Assistance Corps (CAC): There is presently no mechanism for civilians with special
skill-sets (be they doctors, lawyers, engineers, city planners, agriculture specialists, police, etc.) and a
sense of service, to be trained and organized to help their nation when it needs them. The Civilian
Assistance Corps (modeled after similar auxiliary groups in Virginia and California) would provide each
federal agency a pool of volunteer experts willing to deploy in crises. They would be pre-trained and
screened for deployment to supplement departments’ expeditionary teams. The creation of such a corps
would ensure that true experts carry out tasks such as restoring electricity or creating banking systems,
rather than the current practice of expecting already over-burdened soldiers to assume these roles. An
Obama administration will set a goal of creating a national CAC of 25,000 personnel.

So, it's not a militia, it's professionals serving the military in that capacity. What's that you say? You're still scared? Well, here's a link to GWB's State of the Union address 2007:

www.washingtonpost.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink">Shrub

And for the lazy here's where he proposes THE EXACT SAME THING!!!!!

A second task we can take on together is to design and establish a volunteer civilian reserve corps. Such a corps would function much like our military reserve.

BUSH: Such a corps would function much like our military reserve. It would ease the burden on the armed forces by allowing us to hire civilians with critical skills to serve on missions abroad when America needs them.

It would give people across America who do not wear the uniform a chance to serve in the defining struggle of our time.

Note the lack of outrage when the Neocon King said the same thing. Settle down.

Ok, First off, all you people making the "Georgia idiots dont know anything about soacialism or fascism" remarks... thats as racist as anything anyone could say about Obama. your singling out a group of people whom you dont know personally and making blanket generalizations. you need to stop that.

Secondly, when did ATS become so liberally biased as to just accept anything from a liberal as the answer to all our prayers, or anything said against a liberal as a neocon conspiracy? What happened to the days when the people on ATS looked at the left with the same scrutiny as they did as those on the right? has 8 years of G.W. convinced you all that only republicans are out to get you?

We have a responsibility to give Obama the same scrutiny that we give every other politician. We can not allow ourselves to be swayed by a young healthy face and alot of pretty talk about change.

Originally posted by elysiumfire
Yet, pray tell us, what is it that is motivating the millions of ethnically diverse Americans toward PE Obama? I believe I know the answer, and I'll wager that it has to do with a belief in the Constitution, a belief in what their country could truly be, and a belief in a man who in his principles, embodys the self-same hopes and dreams as they.

And pray tell us, why would blacks vote for Obama for belief in the constitution, when first... Obama is not a constituionalist, and second, according to the constitution, blacks are only 3/5th human.


All you people who think that Obama couldnt be a fascist or a dictator because bush was the real dictator need to wake up, control by force is control by force, regardless of party affiliations or who was in control first. Obama could end Bush's policies only to instate his own fascist policies. I'm not saying he will, i am saying he could... because HE COULD!!

This is not me attacking Obama, this is not me attacking the liberal left, this is me telling you, that we dont know what he will do, and he needs to be watched like we just had 8 years of political hell. All you people throwing around words like "Fear-mongering" need to pull your heads out of the sand.

If he does what he says and leads us with wisdom and sanity, then great... if he turns this nation into a facist regime, it will be because of people like you, who believed everything he said because he wasnt G.W. Bush.

The sharp part of the dagger is both on the left and on the right. but it's strength lies in the middle