President Barack Obama - Term 1 and 2 Thread

[Memorex]

I thought Democrats stayed out of the bedroom. This just gets better and better. And a whole lot creepier.

http://nypost.com/2013/09/15/obamacare-will-question-your-sex-life/

[steveo777]

Did anyone catch this in the last few days?

They're trying to infringe on our privacy further by monitoring 80% of our credit card transactions!

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau officials are seeking to monitor four out of every five U.S. consumer credit card transactions this year — up to 42 billion transactions – through a controversial data-mining program, according to documents obtained by the Washington Examiner.

A CFPB strategic planning document for fiscal years 2013-17 describes the “markets monitoring” program through which officials aim to monitor 80 percent of all credit card transactions in 2013.

Read the rest here:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/cfpbs-dat ... le/2535726

[Boomchild]

I thought Democrats stayed out of the bedroom. This just gets better and better. And a whole lot creepier.

http://nypost.com/2013/09/15/obamacare-will-question-your-sex-life/

The definition of Democrat and Liberal has been updated. It now means totalitarian.

[Boomchild]

Did anyone catch this in the last few days?

They're trying to infringe on our privacy further by monitoring 80% of our credit card transactions!

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau officials are seeking to monitor four out of every five U.S. consumer credit card transactions this year — up to 42 billion transactions – through a controversial data-mining program, according to documents obtained by the Washington Examiner.

A CFPB strategic planning document for fiscal years 2013-17 describes the “markets monitoring” program through which officials aim to monitor 80 percent of all credit card transactions in 2013.

Read the rest here:

http://washingtonexaminer.com/cfpbs-dat ... le/2535726

I think its safe to assume that they are spying on everything you are doing and if not, they will be very soon. The Bill Of Rights and the Constitution don't mean jack shit to anyone in Washington anymore. Especially with a leader who feels he can do what ever the fuck he wants to. And why not, it's not like there is anyone there to stand up and stop him.

[slucero]

you just can't make this shit up...

Obama: 'Raising the Debt Ceiling...Does Not Increase Our Debt,' Though It Has 'Over 100 Times'
http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/craig-ban ... t-has-over

Raising the debt ceiling doesn't increase the nation's debt, Pres. Obama declared in a speech today.

In a speech at the Business Roundtable headquarters in Washington, D.C., Obama dismissed concerns about raising the debt ceiling by noting that it'd been done so many times in the past:

Raising the debt ceiling doesn't increase the nation's debt, Pres. Obama declared in a speech today.

In a speech at the Business Roundtable headquarters in Washington, D.C., Obama dismissed concerns about raising the debt ceiling by noting that it'd been done so many times in the past:

"Now, this debt ceiling -- I just want to remind people in case you haven't been keeping up -- raising the debt ceiling, which has been done over a hundred times, does not increase our debt; it does not somehow promote profligacy. All it does is it says you got to pay the bills that you've already racked up, Congress. It's a basic function of making sure that the full faith and credit of the United States is preserved."

Obama went on to suggest that "the average person" mistakenly thinks that raising the debt ceiling means the U.S. is racking up more debt:

"It's always a tough vote because the average person thinks raising the debt ceiling must mean that we're running up our debt, so people don't like to vote on it, and, typically, there's some gamesmanship in terms of making the President's party shoulder the burden of raising the -- taking the vote."

But, isn't the fact that the U.S. has hit its debt ceiling "over a hundred times" - and, thus, has had to keep raising it - proof that raising the limit does, in fact, lead to increased debt?

[Boomchild]

you just can't make this shit up...

Obama: 'Raising the Debt Ceiling...Does Not Increase Our Debt,' Though It Has 'Over 100 Times'
http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/craig-ban ... t-has-over

Raising the debt ceiling doesn't increase the nation's debt, Pres. Obama declared in a speech today.

In a speech at the Business Roundtable headquarters in Washington, D.C., Obama dismissed concerns about raising the debt ceiling by noting that it'd been done so many times in the past:

Raising the debt ceiling doesn't increase the nation's debt, Pres. Obama declared in a speech today.

In a speech at the Business Roundtable headquarters in Washington, D.C., Obama dismissed concerns about raising the debt ceiling by noting that it'd been done so many times in the past:

"Now, this debt ceiling -- I just want to remind people in case you haven't been keeping up -- raising the debt ceiling, which has been done over a hundred times, does not increase our debt; it does not somehow promote profligacy. All it does is it says you got to pay the bills that you've already racked up, Congress. It's a basic function of making sure that the full faith and credit of the United States is preserved."

Obama went on to suggest that "the average person" mistakenly thinks that raising the debt ceiling means the U.S. is racking up more debt:

"It's always a tough vote because the average person thinks raising the debt ceiling must mean that we're running up our debt, so people don't like to vote on it, and, typically, there's some gamesmanship in terms of making the President's party shoulder the burden of raising the -- taking the vote."

But, isn't the fact that the U.S. has hit its debt ceiling "over a hundred times" - and, thus, has had to keep raising it - proof that raising the limit does, in fact, lead to increased debt?

The scary part of this is that the "low information voter" as some people describe the uninformed or misinformed will take this as truth as good as the gospel.

[steveo777]

you just can't make this shit up...

Obama: 'Raising the Debt Ceiling...Does Not Increase Our Debt,' Though It Has 'Over 100 Times'
http://cnsnews.com/mrctv-blog/craig-ban ... t-has-over

Raising the debt ceiling doesn't increase the nation's debt, Pres. Obama declared in a speech today.

In a speech at the Business Roundtable headquarters in Washington, D.C., Obama dismissed concerns about raising the debt ceiling by noting that it'd been done so many times in the past:

Raising the debt ceiling doesn't increase the nation's debt, Pres. Obama declared in a speech today.

In a speech at the Business Roundtable headquarters in Washington, D.C., Obama dismissed concerns about raising the debt ceiling by noting that it'd been done so many times in the past:

"Now, this debt ceiling -- I just want to remind people in case you haven't been keeping up -- raising the debt ceiling, which has been done over a hundred times, does not increase our debt; it does not somehow promote profligacy. All it does is it says you got to pay the bills that you've already racked up, Congress. It's a basic function of making sure that the full faith and credit of the United States is preserved."

Obama went on to suggest that "the average person" mistakenly thinks that raising the debt ceiling means the U.S. is racking up more debt:

"It's always a tough vote because the average person thinks raising the debt ceiling must mean that we're running up our debt, so people don't like to vote on it, and, typically, there's some gamesmanship in terms of making the President's party shoulder the burden of raising the -- taking the vote."

But, isn't the fact that the U.S. has hit its debt ceiling "over a hundred times" - and, thus, has had to keep raising it - proof that raising the limit does, in fact, lead to increased debt?

The scary part of this is that the "low information voter" as some people describe the uninformed or misinformed will take this as truth as good as the gospel.

True. Just to give you an idea of how some people think, I have a half sister, about 18 years younger than me. She is a devout Obama supporter. When George Zimmerman was acquitted, she went "Wow, I didn't know that option was even on the table" I am sincerely convinced that there are 40 some percent of America that don't understand how things work and only look for their truths what in the main stream media tells them to believe.

[The Sushi Hunter]

I think its safe to assume that they are spying on everything you are doing and if not, they will be very soon. The Bill Of Rights and the Constitution don't mean jack shit to anyone in Washington anymore. Especially with a leader who feels he can do what ever the fuck he wants to. And why not, it's not like there is anyone there to stand up and stop him.

I hope no one's surprised when it becomes known that they are even listening in on private conversations of iphone users who are not even having the conversation over the phone, but just having the phone present during the conversation.

The phones already track your movements even when your not on the phone. Same with everything else about the phone such as the mic and cam. No one will take that into consideration though until another whistleblower comes forward with that fact. Right now it's simply just a silly contemplation by Sushi.

[The Sushi Hunter]

Looks like BOzo's not happy right now in regards to his BOzocare. He's now badmouthing the system in which he is supposed to stand for. They've voted on it and he's claiming who went against him is "messing with him".

Every day I dislike this SOB more and more.

[Boomchild]

Looks like BOzo's not happy right now in regards to his BOzocare. He's now badmouthing the system in which he is supposed to stand for. They've voted on it and he's claiming who went against him is "messing with him".

Every day I dislike this SOB more and more.

Welcome to the club. I never liked the guy from day one. Speaking of B.O. ranting about what Congress has done with regards to funding for the HCRA, coming on the heals of this Home Depot drops a bomb to all of it's part time employees that they will not be providing health care coverage options. Which means that those employes will need to obtain coverage through the health care exchange system. So I think B.O. has an incorrect notion that Congress is blocking what everybody wants.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09 ... employees/

[steveo777]

Looks like BOzo's not happy right now in regards to his BOzocare. He's now badmouthing the system in which he is supposed to stand for. They've voted on it and he's claiming who went against him is "messing with him".

Every day I dislike this SOB more and more.

Welcome to the club. I never liked the guy from day one. Speaking of B.O. ranting about what Congress has done with regards to funding for the HCRA, coming on the heals of this Home Depot drops a bomb to all of it's part time employees that they will not be providing health care coverage options. Which means that those employes will need to obtain coverage through the health care exchange system. So I think B.O. has an incorrect notion that Congress is blocking what everybody wants.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09 ... employees/

Walgreens is doing the same thing, but to the tune of 160,000 employees. My daughter works for them. She supported Obama, initially, now she despises him. ObamaCare is going to wreck our economy. Why don't any of the liberals understand this? Are they operating on the belief that this means more free shit for them? If ObamaCare can't be immediately defunded, then it needs not to be delayed. Bring it! The mid terms are coming and several democrats in the senate are up for reelection. When we can get back to a conservative house and senate, then, and only then might we stand a chance of ever having a thriving economy again.

[Boomchild]

Walgreens is doing the same thing, but to the tune of 160,000 employees. My daughter works for them. She supported Obama, initially, now she despises him. ObamaCare is going to wreck our economy. Why don't any of the liberals understand this? Are they operating on the belief that this means more free shit for them? If ObamaCare can't be immediately defunded, then it needs not to be delayed. Bring it! The mid terms are coming and several democrats in the senate are up for reelection. When we can get back to a conservative house and senate, then, and only then might we stand a chance of ever having a thriving economy again.

This will be just the tip of the iceberg. I am confident that we will see more and more large companies following this same path. Liberals don't believe it because they have bought and continue to buy the pipe dream that B.O. and those like him have pitched to them. Only when the pipe dream unravels and they are impacted by it personally will they realize they have been sold a sack of shit. It will be like a smack to their face that seems to come out of nowhere. As far as elections and putting what people "think " are conservatives or people with the right answers to problems will our issues be solved, that to is a pipe dream. In order to have real change and effective results to our problems it will have to come from us the citizens in a grass roots type effort. Something that circumvents the very system that has be manipulated into something that doesn't work. According to folks like Mark Levin one viable option appears to be article 5 of the Constitution. His new book the Liberty Amendments discusses this subject very well.

[slucero]

The unions are feeling that sack hit them now.. lots are unions that Obama lied to are now realizing it..

[Boomchild]

The unions are feeling that sack hit them now.. lots are unions that Obama lied to are now realizing it..

I can see that. I think it's going to take something even more painful then this for people to realize how bad it really is.

[slucero]

The unions are feeling that sack hit them now.. lots are unions that Obama lied to are now realizing it..

I can see that. I think it's going to take something even more painful then this for people to realize how bad it really is.

I honestly don't see that happening....

What ails this country is far more endemic than a simple change of awareness... I don't believe for a minute that there will be a sudden "awakening", because this country has been in the process of being conditioned to simply be indifferent to losing their freedoms and morality, for a very long time now.

[steveo777]

The unions are feeling that sack hit them now.. lots are unions that Obama lied to are now realizing it..

I can see that. I think it's going to take something even more painful then this for people to realize how bad it really is.

I honestly don't see that happening....

What ails this country is far more endemic than a simple change of awareness... I don't believe for a minute that there will be a sudden "awakening", because this country has been in the process of being conditioned to simply be indifferent to losing their freedoms and morality, for a very long time now.

Paul Harvey was seeing this trend clear back in 1965! It was worth the listen for me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H3Az0oka ... e=youtu.be

[Boomchild]

The unions are feeling that sack hit them now.. lots are unions that Obama lied to are now realizing it..

I can see that. I think it's going to take something even more painful then this for people to realize how bad it really is.

I honestly don't see that happening....

What ails this country is far more endemic than a simple change of awareness... I don't believe for a minute that there will be a sudden "awakening", because this country has been in the process of being conditioned to simply be indifferent to losing their freedoms and morality, for a very long time now.

I was speaking in terms of something devastating. Such as people not being able to get even the basic necessities to live. But it's hard to say when that could happen. For me what is frustrating is people who seem to have suggestions on what would solve our problems don't look at the real source of it. Which is how a large section of American voters think. Until a way can be found to effectively change the way they cling to ideas and views that clearly don't work we are doomed. After all, with the way our system of government works it is these people that are electing the wrong people to run this country.

[slucero]

I was speaking in terms of something devastating. Such as people not being able to get even the basic necessities to live. But it's hard to say when that could happen. For me what is frustrating is people who seem to have suggestions on what would solve our problems don't look at the real source of it. Which is how a large section of American voters think. Until a way can be found to effectively change the way they cling to ideas and views that clearly don't work we are doomed. After all, with the way our system of government works it is these people that are electing the wrong people to run this country.

I don't think that even the loss of benefits would have much effect..

We live in an era of very little critical thinking skill on the part of the average citizen.. they have a NIMBY attitude about most things.. barely 50% of the voting age populace votes... and a good portion vote blindly Dem or Rep..

The only thing they pay attention to a simple, bite-size things..

I see only one outcome of this slow economic slide.... war.

[Boomchild]

I don't think that even the loss of benefits would have much effect..

We live in an era of very little critical thinking skill on the part of the average citizen.. they have a NIMBY attitude about most things.. barely 50% of the voting age populace votes... and a good portion vote blindly Dem or Rep..

The only thing they pay attention to a simple, bite-size things..

I see only one outcome of this slow economic slide.... war.

If people were to lose their SSI benefits on a massive scale I'm sure we would see riots. As far as war goes, I think regardless of our economic situation that's going to happen due to B.O.'s poor handling of foreign policy.

[slucero]

I don't think that even the loss of benefits would have much effect..

We live in an era of very little critical thinking skill on the part of the average citizen.. they have a NIMBY attitude about most things.. barely 50% of the voting age populace votes... and a good portion vote blindly Dem or Rep..

The only thing they pay attention to a simple, bite-size things..

I see only one outcome of this slow economic slide.... war.

If people were to lose their SSI benefits on a massive scale I'm sure we would see riots. As far as war goes, I think regardless of our economic situation that's going to happen due to B.O.'s poor handling of foreign policy.

I never said we wouldn't see riots.. or domestic unrest.. I said "I don't think the loss of benefits would have much effect.. "

The reason is that there is enough of a paramilitary police infrastructure (police, sheriff, Homeland Security) in place that any domestic unrest would be quelled.


Do some historical research and you will find that war mostly comes as a result of economic unrest.. not bad foreign policy...

WWII came about because post-WWI Germany was destroyed and emasculated by the Treaty of Versailles. It destroyed Germany's economy and plunged Germany into a horrible decade long depression. This depression is how a man like Hitler got ELECTED to office. He promised to return Germany to the "good times".. and he did.. he created jobs, eliminated crime and restored the German economy. To the German people he is the man who brought them out of the depression, and restored their quality of life.

in effect WWII.. was caused by the harsh consequences imposed on German as the loser of WWI.

Today, there is so much debt worldwide... it is smothering any possibility of economic prosperity.. the kind of prosperity that breeds peace and goodwill between nations... when this debt reaches its tipping point.. the only choices nations will have to make are who the winners and losers are going to be... and there will be a war to settle that question, because...

To the winner goes the spoils, to the loser goes debt and default.

[Boomchild]

I never said we wouldn't see riots.. or domestic unrest.. I said "I don't think the loss of benefits would have much effect.. "

The reason is that there is enough of a paramilitary police infrastructure (police, sheriff, Homeland Security) in place that any domestic unrest would be quelled.


Do some historical research and you will find that war mostly comes as a result of economic unrest.. not bad foreign policy...

WWII came about because post-WWI Germany was destroyed and emasculated by the Treaty of Versailles. It destroyed Germany's economy and plunged Germany into a horrible decade long depression. This depression is how a man like Hitler got ELECTED to office. He promised to return Germany to the "good times".. and he did.. he created jobs, eliminated crime and restored the German economy. To the German people he is the man who brought them out of the depression, and restored their quality of life.

in effect WWII.. was caused by the harsh consequences imposed on German as the loser of WWI.

Today, there is so much debt worldwide... it is smothering any possibility of economic prosperity.. the kind of prosperity that breeds peace and goodwill between nations... when this debt reaches its tipping point.. the only choices nations will have to make are who the winners and losers are going to be... and there will be a war to settle that question, because...

To the winner goes the spoils, to the loser goes debt and default.

I'm not saying anybody said anything. Just making an observation. Also, I am not arguing with history as it relates to war. All I am saying is that with B.O.'s agenda war will come regardless of the economic aspects. He clearly does not think that the U.S. should be the world's sole super power and should he succeed in that, in my mind it will bring war.

[steveo777]

If only 5% of our population, rose up against the government, you would have over 15 million pissed off, armed patriots, against approximately 1.4 million active military members. That's only 5%! On the ground, the military would be out gunned. The only way they could overcome that many patriotic fighters would be air strikes and chemicals. I think there is going to come a day when a fairly large number of Americans are going to say enough is enough and they will take action.

[slucero]

I'm not saying anybody said anything. Just making an observation. Also, I am not arguing with history as it relates to war. All I am saying is that with B.O.'s agenda war will come regardless of the economic aspects. He clearly does not think that the U.S. should be the world's sole super power and should he succeed in that, in my mind it will bring war.

Well then I agree with him... we shouldn't be the worlds sole superpower, or police force for that matter..

You know who else would agree with him?................. George Washington...

Anyone who believes that it is the mission of the USA to "spread democracy" are, regardless of party... neocons

The Framers and Founders intended the federal government to secure the peace for the US by protecting the country from being attacked.. NOT by preemptively attacking other sovereign nations or engaging in covert "nation building". Washington's own farewell speech clearly warns of the danger in doing so.

The irony that Woodrow Wilson would say the following on July 4th, 1918.....

“It has been left for us to see to it that it shall be understood that they [the Founders] spoke and acted, not for a single people only, but for all mankind. We are in this war to fulfill the promise of their vision; having achieved our own liberty we are to strive for the liberties of every other people as well.”

is bad enough.... but that he said it at George Washington’s tomb on Mount Vernon should show just how long this stupid belief has been around, and how brazen those who believe it are... that they would twist the intent of Washington's own words.. on his grave.

[steveo777]

Alabama Supreme Court expected to rule on Obama's selective service failure:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/obamas ... rule-soon/

Fraud Attorney W.L. Albert Moore, Jr., no relation to Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore, filed an Amicus Curiae brief in this case seeking clarity on whether or not sitting President Barack Hussein Obama in fact lost his US citizenship allegedly in or around 1980 when he failed to register with the Selective Service draft as required by U.S. law. Deliberations here in the Friend of the Court filing involve whether or not Barry Soetoro-Barack Hussein Obama repatriated after being adopted by Stanley Ann Dunham’s second husband, Indonesian Lolo Soetoro, sometime prior to the lost 1/2 year decade of 1980-1985. Islamic Indonesia required students enrolling in their school system to be citizens of that country according to web data which may or may not speak to what is going on here. As Attorney Moore told CiR, absent epithelial evidence ordered by a grand jury, we just may never know what is going on.

[Boomchild]

I'm not saying anybody said anything. Just making an observation. Also, I am not arguing with history as it relates to war. All I am saying is that with B.O.'s agenda war will come regardless of the economic aspects. He clearly does not think that the U.S. should be the world's sole super power and should he succeed in that, in my mind it will bring war.

Well then I agree with him... we shouldn't be the worlds sole superpower, or police force for that matter..

You know who else would agree with him?................. George Washington...

Anyone who believes that it is the mission of the USA to "spread democracy" are, regardless of party... neocons

The Framers and Founders intended the federal government to secure the peace for the US by protecting the country from being attacked.. NOT by preemptively attacking other sovereign nations or engaging in covert "nation building". Washington's own farewell speech clearly warns of the danger in doing so.

The irony that Woodrow Wilson would say the following on July 4th, 1918.....

“It has been left for us to see to it that it shall be understood that they [the Founders] spoke and acted, not for a single people only, but for all mankind. We are in this war to fulfill the promise of their vision; having achieved our own liberty we are to strive for the liberties of every other people as well.”

is bad enough.... but that he said it at George Washington’s tomb on Mount Vernon should show just how long this stupid belief has been around, and how brazen those who believe it are... that they would twist the intent of Washington's own words.. on his grave.

I for one am not in favor of the U.S. being the world police or the architects of "democracy" around the globe. Let the rest of the world figure it out for themselves. What I have a problem with is just how B.O. is looking to reach "sharing the power". He is reducing our defenses, doesn't seem to care about America's sovereignty or our personal liberties. He is going to leave this country vulnerable.

[Boomchild]

Alabama Supreme Court expected to rule on Obama's selective service failure:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/obamas ... rule-soon/

Fraud Attorney W.L. Albert Moore, Jr., no relation to Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore, filed an Amicus Curiae brief in this case seeking clarity on whether or not sitting President Barack Hussein Obama in fact lost his US citizenship allegedly in or around 1980 when he failed to register with the Selective Service draft as required by U.S. law. Deliberations here in the Friend of the Court filing involve whether or not Barry Soetoro-Barack Hussein Obama repatriated after being adopted by Stanley Ann Dunham’s second husband, Indonesian Lolo Soetoro, sometime prior to the lost 1/2 year decade of 1980-1985. Islamic Indonesia required students enrolling in their school system to be citizens of that country according to web data which may or may not speak to what is going on here. As Attorney Moore told CiR, absent epithelial evidence ordered by a grand jury, we just may never know what is going on.

This old argument again? When are people going to realize your not going to be able to dethrone B.O. with this stuff? You can be sure they will produce or doctor any records that pertain to this argument. This is a waste of time and money.

[steveo777]

Alabama Supreme Court expected to rule on Obama's selective service failure:

http://www.westernjournalism.com/obamas ... rule-soon/

Fraud Attorney W.L. Albert Moore, Jr., no relation to Alabama Supreme Court Justice Roy Moore, filed an Amicus Curiae brief in this case seeking clarity on whether or not sitting President Barack Hussein Obama in fact lost his US citizenship allegedly in or around 1980 when he failed to register with the Selective Service draft as required by U.S. law. Deliberations here in the Friend of the Court filing involve whether or not Barry Soetoro-Barack Hussein Obama repatriated after being adopted by Stanley Ann Dunham’s second husband, Indonesian Lolo Soetoro, sometime prior to the lost 1/2 year decade of 1980-1985. Islamic Indonesia required students enrolling in their school system to be citizens of that country according to web data which may or may not speak to what is going on here. As Attorney Moore told CiR, absent epithelial evidence ordered by a grand jury, we just may never know what is going on.

This old argument again? When are people going to realize your not going to be able to dethrone B.O. with this stuff? You can be sure they will produce or doctor any records that pertain to this argument. This is a waste of time and money.

I understand. I don't recall anything actually making it to a court before. And even IF there is real evidence, there is enough power in the administration to make sure it never goes anywhere.

[slucero]

I for one am not in favor of the U.S. being the world police or the architects of "democracy" around the globe. Let the rest of the world figure it out for themselves. What I have a problem with is just how B.O. is looking to reach "sharing the power". He is reducing our defenses, doesn't seem to care about America's sovereignty or our personal liberties. He is going to leave this country vulnerable.

That's what the UN is for.. being the worlds police force...

as for "sharing power".. there is no sharing of power... the Constitution does not allow treaties to become law unless ratified by Congress... Obama can complain, plan, and subvert all he wants... he would have to bypass Congress to do such a thing... and so far he hasn't been able to..

Strength-wise the US military is still the same it was during Bush.. so Obama has done nothing to degrade our defenses or our ability to defend ourselves..

Sovereignty-wise... anything Obama does (treaties, bills) that would sniff of softening U.S. sovereignty would have to be vetted and ratified by Congress.. and so far they've stopped anything that has..

Personal liberty -wise.. it was Bush who brought us The Patriot Act... and Obama who keeps re-upping it (after saying he'd repeal it)... all this NSA, IRS bullshit has been in the works since before Bush..


I get your disdain for Obama.. I share it...

But Obama is a one, in a long line of bad apples, and more importantly he and Bush are an example of us "getting what we deserve" as a nation when the populace has been successfully conditioned to be apathetic.

[Boomchild]

That's what the UN is for.. being the worlds police force...

as for "sharing power".. there is no sharing of power... the Constitution does not allow treaties to become law unless ratified by Congress... Obama can complain, plan, and subvert all he wants... he would have to bypass Congress to do such a thing... and so far he hasn't been able to..

Strength-wise the US military is still the same it was during Bush.. so Obama has done nothing to degrade our defenses or our ability to defend ourselves..

Sovereignty-wise... anything Obama does (treaties, bills) that would sniff of softening U.S. sovereignty would have to be vetted and ratified by Congress.. and so far they've stopped anything that has..

Personal liberty -wise.. it was Bush who brought us The Patriot Act... and Obama who keeps re-upping it (after saying he'd repeal it)... all this NSA, IRS bullshit has been in the works since before Bush..


I get your disdain for Obama.. I share it...

But Obama is a one, in a long line of bad apples, and more importantly he and Bush are an example of us "getting what we deserve" as a nation when the populace has been successfully conditioned to be apathetic.

I should clarify a few things. When I said reducing our defenses, I was referring to him reducing our nuclear arms as well as not making sure the ones in place are maintained and updated as needed. Also, this administration has announced that they will be reducing our military force. When is comes to sovereignty it's his stance on border security or lack thereof in addition his position on illegal immigration. Of course this also involves Congress but as the POTUS he should be making sure this is handled according to the laws already passed. As far as personal liberty in addition to continuing the Patriot Act you could also include the health care reform act as an infringement on personal liberty. Especially when they expect you to report who you sleep with, how often etc. plus, all the personal health data providers are expected to report to the federal government . Throw in the anti-gun agenda as well. I'm sure there is much more to come. I like many understand that some of these things did not start with B.O. and that he comes after a long line of bad apples. My comments are not in defense of past POTUS. I have a firm belief though, that B.O. is and will be the most dangerous, radical thinking person to ever hold the position of POTUS. He will be the final nail in the coffin of the U.S. as we know it and how our founding fathers expected this republic to be.

[slucero]

I should clarify a few things. When I said reducing our defenses, I was referring to him reducing our nuclear arms as well as not making sure the ones in place are maintained and updated as needed. Also, this administration has announced that they will be reducing our military force. When is comes to sovereignty it's his stance on border security or lack thereof in addition his position on illegal immigration. Of course this also involves Congress but as the POTUS he should be making sure this is handled according to the laws already passed. As far as personal liberty in addition to continuing the Patriot Act you could also include the health care reform act as an infringement on personal liberty. Especially when they expect you to report who you sleep with, how often etc. plus, all the personal health data providers are expected to report to the federal government . Throw in the anti-gun agenda as well. I'm sure there is much more to come. I like many understand that some of these things did not start with B.O. and that he comes after a long line of bad apples. My comments are not in defense of past POTUS. I have a firm belief though, that B.O. is and will be the most dangerous, radical thinking person to ever hold the position of POTUS. He will be the final nail in the coffin of the U.S. as we know it and how our founding fathers expected this republic to be.

All the things you mention in your paragraph

• reducing nuclear arms
• border security
• illegal (or legal) immigration
• Patriot Act
• ACA (obamacare)
• NDAA
• gun control

.... have to be approved by Congress... none can be done by Obama unilaterally.. he can threaten, has threatened, but ultimately it always falls to Congress.

gun control was killed by Congress
the Patriot Act was renewed by Congress
Obamacare was passed by Congress
the NDAA was approved by Congress



I think Obama is nothing more than a puppet.. who's just really bad at being a puppet.. and any blame directed at him (or Bush, or any POTUS) that does not equally damn Congress, is akin to blaming the "sky for being blue"...