Shut Up Already With The Anti-POTUS Drivel

Originally posted by jaynkeel
reply to post by guohua

 

Not sure if saying Welcome to the United States is the right thing but, Welcome guohua. It truly is sad that we have to have so many people from depressed nations move here only to be let down and led down a similar path that they just left. And whats sadder is that so many that live here already and have never faced these things before will never believe you and yours when you try to tell them what is really going on, either that or they have some twisted fantasies and prefer to let others dictate them around.

No kidding, I think our friend guohua may have jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire.

"It looked good in the travel brochures."

Welcome anyway G. I'm afraid you're about to get a lesson in how freedom is maintained.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion. The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions, it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ... And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is its natural manure." ~ Thomas Jefferson (Founding Father and British Traitor.)

I hope it doesn't come to that, I really do. I would never want to take the life of another human being even if my own life, or the lives of my loved ones were in danger; but if the fight is brought to me I will. I have no problem laying down my life for the cause of freedom. My forefathers did it; how could I do any less?

.

Originally posted by Exsisto

Originally posted by OldCorp

Originally posted by Exsisto
reply to post by OldCorp

 

By the way, so what if Obama is Muslim? Why do you care what religion he is? I mean it's not like any religion has the market cornered on good faith.

I DON'T care what religion he is; but I DO expect him to be honest about it.

Keep in mind, we're talking about politicians here, Sir.

You have a point there.

RON PAUL 2012

At least he's honest.

Originally posted by guohua
reply to post by jaynkeel

 

In My Mind,,, This Young Man On The Bench, Represents All Americans, Be You, Black, Brown, White, Asian or Ex-Communist Decent, Obama and his Henchmen are Stepping On Us!

I don't think the old dude is getting ready to shine Obama's shoes G. It looks more like he want to keep Obama from taking a crap on the Constitution.

Originally posted by Annee


Yes - - states rights that are about location - - geographic and weather needs.

Not Civil Rights - - - or Marriage Rights.

Well, that is not exactly true. Marriage is actually a religious establishment, not run by the state. The laws of unions are run by the States and they do get to choose how their States will allow or recognize unions between people. It is not a federal role. Civil Rights is actually taken care of in the Constitution, so therefore it is done. If Congress wants marriage rights in the Constitution that is fine, amend it.

Originally posted by Brandon88
reply to post by Exsisto

 

No I doubt Obama will still be in office by then. Even if re-elected at this rate the country will collapse by then if not shortly after due to his economic decisions and waste of his first term, so keep living in your fantasy world buddy.

Oh if only. The same things have been said by countless throngs of people since before Nixon was in office. Let's check in with each other after January next year, deal?

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Listen, I am not going to call you any names, but I am going to question your understanding of THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.

Not only do people have the right to disagree with the POTUS, they SHOULD disagree, VERY VOCALLY. That's what the first amendment is about. While you're whining about disrespect, he is taking that right away.

If it would satisfy your pet peeve, maybe we can refer to the president as "Mr. Asshat." Fair enough?

edit on 23-3-2012 by AwakeinNM because: (no reason given)

You don't have to resort to name-calling to prove yourself immature. Your passive aggressive response and poor reading comprehension lay you right bare, and I'm happy to point it out without calling you any names, deserved or otherwise.

reply to post by OldCorp


I want to Thank You and jaynkeel for you concerns, But,,, My husband is American and we meet in China,( I really shouldn't go into that )
My husband Loves America and as spilled blood as many have for this Great Country.

My husband, Myself and our Daughter, Well Fight and Die if Necessary For This Great Nation and All The Freedoms We Have.

I know Communism, It is all controlling, just look at Chinas One Child Policy,,,, If you want to have another child in China, You need to file the proper form with your local city government and pay a large fee,, ( fine ). I will not live under the Thumb of the Government Ever Again.

If you want to follow Obama and live in his Shadow, Then you had better get out and rally the vote for him and his henchmen,,,,,Because I'm here to tell you, Myself, my daughter and many more peoples, many my family and other Chinese, have been Granted Our American Citizenship, We Are Voting and Along with my husband, We Are Not Voting For Obama,,,,,, No-Way, No-How, Not Ever Going To Happen.

Free Living, Thinking and Breathing,
Guohua

Originally posted by jaynkeel

And one could say it worked so well that it expanded way beyond the original 13 colonies and 1.3 million people for over 200 yrs. Well until recently when the Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas got their hands on it, mangled it and distorted it to fit their own personal agendas. See you can't have your cake and eat it to. Whats kinda funny in all this is people that think like you that want the constitution gotten rid of and everything rewritten are now considered terrorists under the homeland security guidelines, you know rebels, dissenters, funny how that blade swings both ways isn't it?

No, what's really funny is that you think it's the "Bushes, Clintons, and Obamas" who are responsible for the state of the nation today. That made me laugh.

Please hit the books. Eisenhower warned of the impending dangers of a Military-Industrial Complex out of control when he left office. Here, I'll make the research easy for you (it's on the Interwebs!!): www.h-net.org...

reply to post by Exsisto


They are the three most recent offenders. There have been others, but certainly none of them have anything on the anointed one. Oops was that considered derogatory as well? Thats the closest ATS has for a tongue in cheek smiley, no I am not razzing you lol...

reply to post by Exsisto


Yea that's fine with me i'll admit I was wrong if it turns out the other way after by January.

Go back in time to lets say,,,,,,2006 and listen to the Democrats and Obama about the High Price of Gas and Who's Fault it was.

Now, I ask you,,,,, you believe anything that comes out this mans mouth?
If you do,,,,, G_D Help You!

Edit To Add: Some of you keep saying it's not Obamas Fault we pay so much at the pump,,,, I Say It Is For A Number Of Reasons!

Originally posted by IrVulture

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by IrVulture

Well, I'll tell ya, There are still a lot of us out there, (Behind every OTHER blade of grass), who still have a grip on reality...

A good step in the RIGHT direction would be, Bring back "The Fairness Doctrine"

Why would you want to do that? So that media like Air America and Al Franken could still be on the air despite having NO AUDIENCE? Don't even argue this point, my friend - it is simple economics of the broadcasting business. No audience = no show. Why do you think people like Rush Limbaugh, Mark Levin and the people you quote below have huge audiences? Because people like what they say and agree with them. Nobody listened to Franken because his views were extreme left. He failed because a very few number of people liked what he said. Explain to me how that could be, since at least half of people in America are liberals like yourself?

You obviously didn't bother to read the link I provided, What is so bad about actual fair and balanced reporting in the media? What has that got to do with liberalism?

I grew up in era when news was unbiased, When we got to hear BOTH sides of the argument and decide for ourselves.

When the Reagan administration trashed that, That is when things started spinning out of control and we started getting all this ultra right-wing, fascist propaganda from the likes of Foxnews, Micheal Savage, Rush Limbaugh, (and the list could go on and on) under the guise of "Entertainment", And the Republicans will never allow it to be reinstated...Why IS that?

See above response. Supply and demand, bud. Simple as that. No one wants to listen to socialist propaganda. The fairness doctrine forces that crap down everyone's throat. Guess what? Even if the FD were still around, NO ONE would listen to those shows.

Again, Educate yourself on what the fairness doctrine REALLY is, and quit trying to spin it into some evil socialist plot.

Beyond that, there is no use in trying to wake you up...

By the way, I consider myself a "Realist", neither left, right or middle. I want what is best for EVERYBODY!

You want what's best for everybody, as long as they are liberal? I highly doubt you are middle of the road, given the fact that you are pushing the fairness doctrine and bashing conservative radio hosts. If I were to guess, I'd say you were really a flaming liberal.

I was waiting for the name calling to start, But ah ain't ah gonna play dat game, I'm better than that.
So, You really believe what these alleged "conservative talk show hosts" tell you?
Even though they will tell you to your face that they are just "entertainers"?
That's just sad dude....

Hey slick, guess what? I have a degree in broadcasting. I've worked in television and radio. I know FULL WELL what the fairness doctrine is.

It is an outdated policy (not law) that the FCC used to make sure both sides of an issue were given equal time. This was in the days of three networks. Nowadays there are so many cable channels and news outlets that all views are represented to the satisfaction of the FCC, so they canned it. Although, I'm not sure all views are fairly represented.

Representing the "left" you have CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, PBS, WB, NPR, Comedy Central, Bravo, HBO, MTV, et al, and talk jocks like Alan Colmes, Mike Malloy and a slew of others. Did I leave anyone out?

In the center you have Fox.

And representing the "right" you have Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Levin, some local jocks, and ZERO television networks.

And you liberals want to bring back the fairness doctrine? Why is that? You can't overcome public dissatisfaction even with the lopsided propaganda machine that you control? You want to "shut conservatives up" because yeah - that's "fair", right? You're all about fairness.

Don't even attempt to school me on the media or the Fairness Doctrine.

reply to post by guohua


Someone earlier in the thread suggested that the President has the ability to raise or lower the price of gasoline. That's simply not the case, and if you really think that; stop reading this, turn off your computer, go outside, get in the car and drive (or ride your bike) to your local community college, and enroll in the next available Economics 101 course.

Gasoline is a cog in one of the wheels of a system known as the global economy.

Crude oil, which is used to make gasoline, is trading (being bought and sold at market) at over $105 per barrel. Even accounting for inflation, in the history of the commodities market the price of a barrel of crude oil has never been higher.

inflationdata.com...

The prices of commodities are determined by the amount of supply available versus the demand. This is basic economics. Gas prices are so high in part because global demand is expected to reach a record level this year. Developing nations are requiring more fuel each year. Suppliers haven't been able to keep up with the growth in demand.

Contrary to what some seem to think, the United States is part of a global economic community. Individual national economies have never been more intertwined on the global scale. If a butterfly flaps its wings in Sudan and the oil supply there is somehow negatively affected by that, just about everyone the world over will feel it at the pump.

I said it earlier in the thread and I'll repeat it because it bears repeating: the responsibility for the cost of gas lies with the consumers. If we didn't use so much of it, it would cost less.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

In the center you have Fox.

Mark those words, because they absolutely compromise what anyone of sound mind will think of your opinions.

I mean, you can't be serious. No one could seriously believe FOX to be anything but right of center. Roger Ailes (President, FOX News) would be rolling in his grave right now if he were dead.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


Yeah, I hate dem libruls too!

A DAY IN THE LIFE OF A CONSERVATIVE

The Conservative gets up at 6:00am to prepare his morning coffee.
He fills his pot full of good clean drinking water because some liberal fought for minimum water quality standards.
He takes his daily medication with his first swallow of coffee.
His medications are safe to take because some liberal fought to insure their safety and that they work as advertised.
All but $10.00 of his medications are paid for by his employers medical plan because some liberal union workers fought their employers for paid medical insurance, now The Conservative gets it too.

He prepares his morning breakfast, bacon and eggs this day.
The Conservative’s bacon is safe to eat because some liberal fought for laws to regulate the meat packing industry.

The Conservative takes his morning shower reaching for his shampoo;
His bottle is properly labeled with every ingredient and the amount of its contents because some liberal fought for his right to know what he was putting on his body and how much it contained.

The Conservative dresses, walks outside and takes a deep breath.
The air he breathes is clean because some tree- hugging liberal fought for laws to stop industries from polluting our air.

The Conservative begins his work day; he has a good job with excellent pay, medicals benefits, retirement, paid holidays and vacation because some liberal union members fought and died for these working standards

If The Conservative is hurt on the job or becomes unemployed he'll get a worker compensation or unemployment check because some liberal didn't think he should lose his home because of his temporary misfortune.

It's noon time, The Conservative needs to make a Bank Deposit so he can pay some bills.
The Conservative’s deposit is federally insured by the FDIC because some liberal wanted to protect The Conservative’s money from unscrupulous bankers who ruined the banking system before the depression.

The Conservative has to pay his Fannie Mae underwritten Mortgage and his below market federal student loan because some stupid liberal decided that The Conservative and the government would be better off if he was educated and earned more money over his lifetime.

The Conservative is home from work, he plans to visit his father this evening at his farm home in the country. He gets in his car for the drive to dad's; his car is among the safest in the world because some liberal fought for car safety standards.

He arrives at his boyhood home. He was the third generation to live in the house financed by Farmers Home Administration because bankers didn't want to make rural loans.

The house didn't have electricity until some big government liberal stuck his nose where it didn't belong and demanded rural electrification. (Those rural Conservatives would still be sitting in the dark)

He is happy to see his dad who is now retired.
His dad lives on Social Security and his union pension because some liberal made sure he could take care of himself so The Conservative wouldn't have to.

After his visit with dad he gets back in his car for the ride home.

He turns on a radio talk show, the host keeps saying that liberals are bad and conservatives are good

(He doesn't tell The Conservative that his beloved Republicans have fought against every protection and benefit The Conservative enjoys throughout his day).
The Conservative agrees,

"We don't need those big government liberals ruining our lives”.

reply to post by IrVulture


Great piece of propaganda, troll.

Liberals are the saviors of the world, right? Otherwise we'd all be living in cesspools left by erosion damage from clearcutting every last tree, getting our water out of the polluted rivers and driving big SUVs powered by the ground up carcasses of endangered baby animals.

I'm glad the fairy tale you live in makes you feel good about yourself. Enjoy.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


Again with the name calling?

Must have struck a nerve!
Why so sensitive?

Why don't you show us a list of things conservatives have done for the good of the country?

Just askin'

Congratulations, you people have successfully bought into the left vs right paradigm. Exactly as your masters have predicted.

Originally posted by Exsisto
You may not like the man in office. You may not have voted for him (for the record, I didn't). If you live in the United States, however, he's still your President, and as such he deserves a modicum of respect.

No. Sorry, but no.

The Executive branch is a concession to the reality of the Fuhrer principle. As such, it doesn't deserve respect at all; quite the opposite. It is a necessary evil at best, and just plain evil at worst. America occasionally has had genuinely great men inhabiting the office, however it hasn't happened since JFK. I used to think Obama was charismatic, but then I realised that I was mistaking charisma for a veritable river of slime.

I've read constant moaning on ATS from those saying how disliked Obama is. How the entire country is against him. The fact is his national approval rating is comparable to (if not better than) what GWB's was toward the end of his first term in office.

ATS is largely a quasi-fascist (politely referred to with the euphemism of "conservative") community. The Republicans generally view their relationship with any Democratic President as a state of all-out war, simply because they're the Republicans and that's what they do. So yes, Obama will be complained about.

Want real change? Let's put an end to the electoral college and the two party system and reform campaign financing laws to even the field for everyone.

I agree with the first two ideas; I don't agree with the third. I would be happy to have a government whose sole literal purpose, was enforcement of the Sherman Act. As far as I am concerned, the only good corporation is a dead one.