They Want the President Dead?

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
reply to post by beansanmash

 

No one in this thread said they wanted to shoot the President and if they did they would be banned.

I have to respectfully disagree:

"These people can see the truth. I applaud them. If we do not stop madmen like Obama things will get worse."

This is from the first comment on the thread.

[edit on 27-7-2010 by beansanmash]

Originally posted by beansanmash

Originally posted by fieryjaguarpaw
reply to post by beansanmash

 

No one in this thread said they wanted to shoot the President and if they did they would be banned.

I have to respectfully disagree:

"These people can see the truth. I applaud them. If we do not stop madmen like Obama things will get worse."

This is from the first comment on the thread.

[edit on 27-7-2010 by beansanmash]

Yes? And? He said needs to be stopped. You do realize you can stop people without shooting or killing them. So... well there.

if one person states, 'i should shoot the president'

and the other person answers: 'yes i applaud you, he needs to be stopped.' i interpret that as that the second person agreeing with the first.

thats just me though, maybe I dont give people enough benefit of the doubt.

reply to post by beansanmash


In the words of Padme Amidala : "You assume too much."

ones actions speak louder than ones words so far no actions i mean b/p could have set off a nuke in the g/o/m still no action he is the potus grow a pair and do your job

Originally posted by JohnPhoenix




Most people voted for Obama.. prove it. Most people did not even vote. Many of those who did vote for him have changed their minds about him now. They see his true colors.

I said we needed to stop Obama, not murder him. Only the people in the story said that.

Most people may not be murderers, but Obama certainly is. He has sent thousands of America's young boys to die for his personal agenda.

I am apparently a murderous traitor?.. so.. you consider the founding fathers murderous traitors too? Who have I killed? Who would i kill in cold blood?

The U.S Constitution gives us the right to bear arms for the purpose of overthrowing our own government when they become a tyrannical faction that does not serve the peoples constitutional rights.

So, your saying anyone who agrees with the U.S Constitution are traitors too?

I say they are patriots who love this country enough to do the right thing and oust the corrupt government.

This stuff is crazy. Especially the part about the Constitution giving us the right to bear arms for the purpose of overthrowing our own government. The Constitution features the 2nd Amendment due to the fact that at the time, the Federal Government did not have a standing army (it had been dismantled after the Revolutionary War) and they needed every state to maintain an organized militia that could be quickly gathered with the other states' militias and deployed as a national defense force in the event of a national defense emergency. The Constitution's 2nd Amendment ensured that there would be no state that could pass a law forbidding such a state militia's formation under the guise of gun control (thereby effectively allowing a state to opt out of the common defense requirement of the federation as a whole) After the war, this became a very real concern due to the personal losses experienced during that war by the people in each state and the pressure they were exerting on their representatives to insulate them from any further involvement in future conflicts.

The irrationality of this poster's rant is exactly what's causing the insanity that we're experiencing. I realize that this post was made in November of last year, but it's only gotten more and more irrational since then. My father-in-law said that this country wasn't ready for a black president when Obama was running, and maybe he was right. That said, we have a black president, and the freakos are not going to change it with belligerence or force without pulling the entire weight of the nation down upon their heads. I wish they were smart enough to understand that.

They aren't, and I hope it doesn't come down to having to sanitize the professional discourse in this society on behalf of protecting these kinds of ignorant people from destroying themselves. With freedom comes responsibility. Like a child who is granted the freedom to cross the street, but only if that child can be responsible enough to handle that freedom without endangering himself or others. Back in the 1920s, Germany probably should have considered the impact of Hitler's freedom of speech on its own future. Some people are simply not capable of handling the impact of such speech responsibly, and the majority of a society has the right to be protected from this sort of devastating impact. Otherwise, the result will be one effort being met aggressively with an overwhelming counter effort, while the instigators sit back and grab the popcorn.

Can someone tell me what this man has done to ruin this country, the over forty crowd must be losing there minds quicker than theyre bowels if they think this country is destroyed by the decisions of one man,Obama and every president before him were just puppets for Congress who are then controlled by big business interest, thats a fact and any over forty person saying other wise its time to change your depends...

If he has the power over US soldiers that are spread across various countries sticking their bullets in people for the love of oil/money/power... then yeah I guess he should either be rehabilitated from his psychopathic state or punished.

If however he has no power and it's in the hands of those in the upper echelons then maybe he should just be punished for going along with it all, like most people in the Gov. should be.

I'm a firm believer in rehabilitation over punishment though , which is a shame

There is some sentiment that appears over and over in this thread that just puzzles me.

"UR LIBERAL".

The op has been accused of is again and again. You'd think she was eating babies or something. She has said several times she didn't vote for Obama and that she voted for Ron Paul. I voted Ron Paul in the primary back in 08 even though he didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of winning. I've since changed my position on him in light of his big mouth son. I'm starting to think he's just a pressure valve of sorts.

Why do you continually feel the need to dislike another person for having a different opinion? That's a real problem in this country. You can't just respect someone doesn't agree with you. No, you need to call them names and belittle them.

So I ask, what crime is it to be a Liberal? and what should we do to people who are liberals?

[edit on 27-7-2010 by antonia]

reply to post by and14263


In some cases, a president is a literal hostage to what's been handed him by the previous administration.

Obama could have decided to immediately withdraw troops from both theaters of war, and that would have sparked enormous outrage across this entire country.
Obama could have canceled and rescinded Bush's TARP program and that would have caused outrage across this entire country.
Obama could have allowed the entire auto manufacturing (and supplychain infrastructure - 2500 US companies in GM's supplychain alone) to fail and there would have been outrage across the board on that decision, and
he could have decided that the economy was going to heal itself without any government help in the form of creating market demand for local and state economies (refusing to allow the creation of the Stimulus Package) and we know that each state would have evaporated a significant % of jobs due to their inability to run a deficit.

The options weren't going to be pretty regardless of what Obama did or didn't do. That's the hard truth of where this nation has been since the late fall of 2008 - two months before Obama even took the job.

He's done what the brightest minds in the world have advised him to do, and he pushed through the first-ever healthcare assurance legislation - which is one of the major items he campaigned on, and got elected by a solid majority of the US voting public to accomplish.

The GOP and its rabid Right simply hate that they are not in power, and that's why they hate Obama and think that everything that he does is hurting the country. It's a visceral desire for getting back in power again, and we saw this exact misery when Clinton was in the White House.

This time, however, their irresponsible nature is being nakedly exposed for what it is, and the majority of Americans are quietly making note of the circus as it performs on the cable news channels every day for the tiny minority that cheers it on.

Words like freedom and liberty ring pretty hollow when screamed by people that are fighting to take control.

Originally posted by Zeropointt07
Can someone tell me what this man has done to ruin this country, the over forty crowd must be losing there minds quicker than theyre bowels if they think this country is destroyed by the decisions of one man,Obama and every president before him were just puppets for Congress who are then controlled by big business interest, thats a fact and any over forty person saying other wise its time to change your depends...

Those are very valid considerations. I recall a noteworthy statement from the documentary Obama Deception, which was something along the lines of "The President is just the front man, placed there to absorb the political heat generated from backlash to unpopular policies by those who control him."

They are given directions and have to play along or they are removed and/or silenced. Calling for the President's blood is like watching a movie and demanding that the lead actor be fired because the movie was poor. (What about the roles of the Studio executives, Writers, Director, Producers etc.?)

[edit on 27/7/2010 by Dark Ghost]

reply to post by antonia

Thanks. antonia. I've been called worse. Most recently a Tea Party Infiltrator I don't think I'm easy to figure out, so maybe it frustrates some because they really don't know where I'm coming from. I can understand that. A person who believes in owning guns and smaller government but also in making sure all kids have healthcare is just strange? No one can understand this? A person who doesn't vote for someone still wants that person to succeed onc the election is over is odd? Mkay.

Some people just have a need to label a person and assign him or her an ideology and all that goes...plain and simple. Maybe this is because it provides a frame of reference from which to judge..,er, I mean...begin a discussion. Labels can, after all, save time. Especially if you use them to immediately dismiss anything and everything a person has to say. Or, conversely, to immediately bond with someone you think has the same ideology, only to later find out they do eat babies.

It's harder to look at a person as an individual. That takes too much work. It's often messy and frustrating. The problem is, if you don't take this time, false assumptions and illogical conclusions multiply, and you waste even more time bickering, explaining, defending, and/or trying to either figure what tidy little compartment someone might fit into. And while this is happening, you lose sight of the issues.

To formulate our opinions on an issue, each one of us has a unique foundation based on the knowledge we've acquired or been given and the experiences we've had. Sometimes we think too deeply on one thing and not at all on another. And sometimes emotion comes into play. We're human, right?

Most often I find that people who toss labels around willy nilly, particularly as some sort of accusations or epithets, place a lot of value, pride, and maybe even self-worth in their own labels. They like having an identity like that. they like fitting in, or having a group to look to for comfort and thought leadership, and often, yes...agendas.

And that's okay...I don't judge anyone for needing this, but I also still don't label them (even if they label themselves). I don't even presume to know that a particluar label means. It might well mean different things to different people. And sometimes I get confused by seeming leaps of logic or by hypocrisy. About as far as I'm willing to go in labeling myself, and I think I said this earlier in this thread, is female and American.

In politics, labels often fool us. A president labeled a compassionate conservative turns out to be a fiscal liberal who takes us to war. Things like that.

And one last thought here is that labels might be particularly dangerous today, when we're already so very fractured as a nation, and they only force the fractures further apart. Any excuse, you know?

Usually when I try to explain this, I get a new set of things thrown at me...you don't know who you are...you can't commit...you have no moral center. Yeah okay. That's fine Can't seem to win.


End of ramble. Sorry.

reply to post by elcapitano75


Yes...you can pray to baby Jesus to pilot Air Force One or Marine One and take them...somewhere

[edit on 7/27/2010 by ~Lucidity]

Not trying to be inflammatory or anything, but I'm just curious: Where was all this hatred and anger during the eight years G.W. Bush was driving this nation into the ground both economically and politically--growing Haliburton's bottom line (and padding Cheney's stock options) by creating two wars that it appears we will never be able to "finish"--helping create and sustain the financial environment that led to the meltdown in late 2008, while simultaneously increasing the share of the nation’s income flowing to the top 1 percent of households from 16.9 percent to 23.5 percent (a larger share than at any point since 1928) from 2002 to 2007? www.cbpp.org...

I'm surprised that the secret service hasn't arrested these elderly people for this. (Be careful they're old and break easy)

In fact, everyone who supports the killing of our president in this thread or elsewhere had better be mindful of the laws.

You're all on "the list" now.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade

Are you saying that if you were me, you would have turned them in?

reply to post by ~Lucidity


You didn't and posted about it here, in your case I hope your story is fictional, because you have in essence reported a crime here.

As for me, I can't see myself reporting it, nor would I have posted about it anywhere... If these are indeed elderly people they are hardly capable of acting upon such threats, but the secret service is required to investigate ANY threats against the president regardless of who or where they come from.

Just my opinion.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade

Thanks for your opinion. Nope...I didn't. And I'm wondering if that was the right decision, which is partly why I posted the story here...for opinions. I may well be getting a call or a visit from the SS yet. If I disappear....

reply to post by ~Lucidity


Posting about it in a public venue (ATS) is practically begging for a visit from the SS.

But you never know, they are quite busy these days and may let this one slide.

Would you really want to see these fragile old people being handcuffed and taken in for interrogations?

Really, some things are better left alone.... In my opinion.

reply to post by Fractured.Facade


No. Not on the surface, and I stated this. But I'm also still trying to decide. I just don't KNOW. MY assumptions about both their frailty and capabilities may be totally erroneous. One of them could very well possibly be a leader of some radical militant group and have vast influence. Then how would I feel if something happened?

If the SS comes, I'll talk to them. No biggie. If what they did was against the law, it was against the law. If this makes me a rat, I'm a rat. And this is exactly why it's disturbing.