Left Gearing Up to Support Open Obama Dictatorship

[Old Rocks]

My, aren't you fruitloops going to be disappointed when President Obama watchs the swearing in of a new President 20Jan17.

 

[JimBowie1958]

My, aren't you fruitloops going to be disappointed when President Obama watchs the swearing in of a new President 20Jan17.

I never said he wasn't.

OR, you seem to be confused here.

Let's try an analogy. Say some thief is casing your business and is maybe going to rob it.

Are you just going to let him continue each day till he gets the nerve up?

If you do nothing and it just happens to be he does not rob you, does that make you a fool to be concerned?

Obama has given himself enormous power in having war time powers during peace time nonemergency conditions.

Maybe he will use it maybe he wont, but it is something to keep an eye on.

Same goes for his little minions calling for an end to Presidential term limits.

Is it likely Obama will declare himself President for Life like Castro did? No, it is more likely he will use a surrogate to stand in for him, etc, a dozen ways exist to do this.

But that does not mean we should just ignore the problem and its potential disastrous consequences.

 

[Old Rocks]

There were minions of Bush calling for the same until his policies became so disastrous that laughter was the only response. The 22nd Amendment stands, and your silly braying is just that.

 

[JimBowie1958]

There were minions of Bush calling for the same until his policies became so disastrous that laughter was the only response. The 22nd Amendment stands, and your silly braying is just that.

And I hope it continues to stand, and expect it will for the foreseeable future.

But again, I am talking about INDICATORS, dude, not probably events.

We need to remain vigilant to protect our Republic and when the Post publishes shyte like that it means at least some of the editors agree and that is a bad thing.

Please do try to read things before you slam them, OK?

 

[JoeB131]

There were minions of Bush calling for the same until his policies became so disastrous that laughter was the only response. The 22nd Amendment stands, and your silly braying is just that.

And I hope it continues to stand, and expect it will for the foreseeable future.

But again, I am talking about INDICATORS, dude, not probably events.

We need to remain vigilant to protect our Republic and when the Post publishes shyte like that it means at least some of the editors agree and that is a bad thing.

Please do try to read things before you slam them, OK?

Or that they are just open to discussion.

I mostly think the 22nd Amendment is an okay idea, but frankly, I'm not married to it.

The reason why it's a good idea is because a president would be expected to keep running long after his ability to do the job well has passed. Reagan would have been expected to run in 1988 had there not been a 22nd Amendment, even though by that time, he was already suffering the first effects of Alzeheimers.

Bill Clinton probably would have beaten Bush easily had he run in 2000, (and saved us SOOO much trouble) but by the end of Bush's term, he was already having heart problems.

The reason it's a bad idea is, heck, maybe the people might WANT a popular president to run a third term. I would hate to think what kind of a mess we might have been in had an amatuer been in the White House in 1941 when we finally got dragged into WWII.

So Not-theSharpest-knife, let's talk about what really bothers you. It's not that Obama will get a third term, it is that the voting coalition that picked him twice will probably pick his successor.

Has it occurred to you that is because there is no real appeal to what your side proposes at this point?

 

[JakeStarkey]

"Obama has given himself war time powers for nonemergency peace time across the whole country, something never done before."

First, Bush as well as Obama have exercised powers openly that other presidents covertly used.

Second, this is the first time the country has been in a perpetual state of war, because we handled a criminal problem as a military one.

Three, it needs to change, and it will take both parties working together to change it.

 

[rebelgirl]

I've said it before, I don't trust either Party anymore. However, I believe Obama is the worst. He has made a mockery of the USA. As far as him being a Dictator, I believe he is. I also believe he will try and keep his job. Hearing that Hillary may run for President next time, guess who will really be standing in the wings as President. Hillary could not even run Secretary of State much less President. I would not be surprise one bit if Obama does not have that in his future plans. It is my belief that he is determined to destroy America.

 

[Katzndogz]

I've said it before, I don't trust either Party anymore. However, I believe Obama is the worst. He has made a mockery of the USA. As far as him being a Dictator, I believe he is. I also believe he will try and keep his job. Hearing that Hillary may run for President next time, guess who will really be standing in the wings as President. Hillary could not even run Secretary of State much less President. I would not be surprise one bit if Obama does not have that in his future plans. It is my belief that he is determined to destroy America.

Barack Obama is a man with only one core conviction. He has, as the basic foundation of his otherwise disorganized and uncertain belief system, the irrefutable tenet that the United States, because of its European roots, has been the epitome of oppression and arrogance throughout its history. Therefore, he is able to rationalize the need to say or do anything as the transformation of American society and the end of the pre-eminent status of the United States are his sole objectives. He has, thus, adopted a pre-meditated schizophrenic personality wherein he comports himself as an apologist and appeaser on the international stage and a narcissistic autocrat at home.
The autocrats that ran roughshod throughout the nineteenth and twentieth century were determined to aggregate power in a central authority and to achieve an exalted position for their countries. Barack Obama, on the other hand, is determined to denigrate and diminish the stature of his nation as he otherwise emulates the tactics of these despots.


Beyond his one immutable and core tenet, Obama wavers between acceptance of hybrid fascism with its emphasis on crony capitalism and inflexible government dominance of the individual and the economy on the one hand, and on the other post-World War II European-style socialism rather than rigid socialist/Marxist ideology. This may be anathema to the hard core left from whence he came, but little do they understand that Barack Obama is driven by retribution not ideology.


After five years, Barack Obama has gone a long way in accomplishing much of what he set out to do, namely, the end of the pre-eminent status of the United States and setting the stage to even the score with the European descendants that dominate American society.


Articles: The Schizophrenia of Barack Obama jV

 

[Avatar4321]

I just pray that those who support this nonsense are in the minority among the left. Because I have no desire to see violence done between my fellow citizens. And if anyone tried to support a dictatorship whether from the right or left, there would be violence.

 

[Peach]

Rangel calls for Obama to rule by decree
Charlie Rangel Wants Presidential Executive Orders for ?Everything? | Politicker

Professor calls for unlimited terms for Obama...i.e. President for life.
End presidential term limits - The Washington Post

And Obama has long used executive power to just ignore Congressionally passed laws or to use regs to implement laws Congress never passed and the libtards love it. They eat it all up.

People, this country will not tolerate a President for Life like Chavez and if this course is continued we will have a shooting war, and I guarantee the libtards will have their asses handed to their survivors in a dump truck.

More hate and fear? Posting one Prof's opinion and one Congressman's suggestion as evidence of anything greater than the opinion of two people is ridiculous. If you wanted your thread to be substantive, you might have expanded the scope to include signing statements; and "I'm the Decider" comments made by President G.W. Bush, such arrogance has never been part of President Obama's rhetoric.

You might have included a number of examples of President Obama's use of executive power not used by the aforementioned George W. and other occupants of the Oval Office.

As it stands, you're (IMO) a bitter, angry, highly partisan and ignorant gun lover who doesn't give a damn for anyone but themselves. A callous conservative who wouldn't give up one round of ammunition even if he knew doing so would end the carnage of gun violence in America.

Rangel is known for shooting off his mouth; there are only three years left, lots of opposition. Not a worry.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Rangel calls for Obama to rule by decree
Charlie Rangel Wants Presidential Executive Orders for ?Everything? | Politicker

Professor calls for unlimited terms for Obama...i.e. President for life.
End presidential term limits - The Washington Post

And Obama has long used executive power to just ignore Congressionally passed laws or to use regs to implement laws Congress never passed and the libtards love it. They eat it all up.

People, this country will not tolerate a President for Life like Chavez and if this course is continued we will have a shooting war, and I guarantee the libtards will have their asses handed to their survivors in a dump truck.

More hate and fear? Posting one Prof's opinion and one Congressman's suggestion as evidence of anything greater than the opinion of two people is ridiculous. If you wanted your thread to be substantive, you might have expanded the scope to include signing statements; and "I'm the Decider" comments made by President G.W. Bush, such arrogance has never been part of President Obama's rhetoric.

You might have included a number of examples of President Obama's use of executive power not used by the aforementioned George W. and other occupants of the Oval Office.

As it stands, you're (IMO) a bitter, angry, highly partisan and ignorant gun lover who doesn't give a damn for anyone but themselves. A callous conservative who wouldn't give up one round of ammunition even if he knew doing so would end the carnage of gun violence in America.

Rangel is known for shooting off his mouth; there are only three years left, lots of opposition. Not a worry.

Are you suggesting that Rangel did not do his due diligence by polling and so forth?

Are you suggesting he does not want to get re-elected?

Does the Washington Post publish bullshit from just anybody now? Do they not vet their articles?

 

[Luissa]

I just pray that those who support this nonsense are in the minority among the left. Because I have no desire to see violence done between my fellow citizens. And if anyone tried to support a dictatorship whether from the right or left, there would be violence.

Yeah! I am pretty sure most on the left don't support a dictatorship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JimBowie1958]

I just pray that those who support this nonsense are in the minority among the left. Because I have no desire to see violence done between my fellow citizens. And if anyone tried to support a dictatorship whether from the right or left, there would be violence.

Yeah! I am pretty sure most on the left don't support a dictatorship.

Based on what data?

Which of the following dictators are unpopular on the left?

1. Chairman Mao who has had a WH Christmas tree ornament in his likeness?

2. Hugo Chavez, whom our dear Potus has said he admires?

3. Fidel Castro whom every Hollyweird leftwing shit-for-brains actor has praised or even made a pilgrimage to see and praise?

Nah, your word isn't good for jack shit; how about some facts?

 

[Luissa]

I just pray that those who support this nonsense are in the minority among the left. Because I have no desire to see violence done between my fellow citizens. And if anyone tried to support a dictatorship whether from the right or left, there would be violence.

Yeah! I am pretty sure most on the left don't support a dictatorship.

Based on what data?

Which of the following dictators are unpopular on the left?

1. Chairman Mao who has had a WH Christmas tree ornament in his likeness?

2. Hugo Chavez, whom our dear Potus has said he admires?

3. Fidel Castro whom every Hollyweird leftwing shit-for-brains actor has praised or even made a pilgrimage to see and praise?

Nah, your word isn't good for jack shit; how about some facts?

Stop mixing medication.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JimBowie1958]

Yeah! I am pretty sure most on the left don't support a dictatorship.

Based on what data?

Which of the following dictators are unpopular on the left?

1. Chairman Mao who has had a WH Christmas tree ornament in his likeness?

2. Hugo Chavez, whom our dear Potus has said he admires?

3. Fidel Castro whom every Hollyweird leftwing shit-for-brains actor has praised or even made a pilgrimage to see and praise?

Nah, your word isn't good for jack shit; how about some facts?

Stop mixing medication.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again, no facts, no reason, just a sad form of sarcastic humor that concedes the points established.

Well done, libtard, well done!

 

[HenryBHough]

Remember, there IS a constitutional provision limiting a president to TWO terms.

There's also one requiring a president be born in The USA.

See why the queasiness?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Remember, there IS a constitutional provision limiting a president to TWO terms.

There's also one requiring a president be born in The USA.

See why the queasiness?

Actually not.

It requires the president to be a citizen via blood or soil, which is why Ted Cruz is eligible to be president, for example.

Consequently there’s no cause for ‘the queasiness.’

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

I just pray that those who support this nonsense are in the minority among the left. Because I have no desire to see violence done between my fellow citizens. And if anyone tried to support a dictatorship whether from the right or left, there would be violence.

Yeah! I am pretty sure most on the left don't support a dictatorship.

Correct.

No one on ‘the left’ supports a ‘dictatorship.’

The notion is as idiotic as the idea that anyone is seeking a third term for Obama.

 

[Old Rocks]

Remember, there IS a constitutional provision limiting a president to TWO terms.

There's also one requiring a president be born in The USA.

See why the queasiness?

Well yes, we all see why the queasiness. When people like you can repeat such fucking bullshit with a straight face, we all understand how lies become political currency.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I just pray that those who support this nonsense are in the minority among the left. Because I have no desire to see violence done between my fellow citizens. And if anyone tried to support a dictatorship whether from the right or left, there would be violence.

Yeah! I am pretty sure most on the left don't support a dictatorship.

Correct.

No one on ‘the left’ supports a ‘dictatorship.’ .

Wow someone needs to tell Rangel is he not a leftist, lol.

The notion is as idiotic as the idea that anyone is seeking a third term for Obama.

Despite the fact that people have been documented doing exactly that.

You libtards view the world through your ideological spectacles so much, you don't know how to ever take them off, even for a moment to read what your opponents say.