It has been suggested that the "right" is being overly critical of President nobama. his supporters say that more time is needed to determine if his programs are going to work. They say, "give him time its only been a few months". When it is pointed out that he has blatantly lied about certain issues and topics, they say "well other presidents lied to" or "he didn't actually say..." this or that, even though anyone with at least 3 brain cells could garner what he was saying. His supporters, as well as obama himself, are quite fond of saying that he is trying to fix the problems that Bush started and that he had no involvement in these "problems" to begin with even though members of his administration were fully aware of what Bush was doing. Most notably is the involvement of princess Pelosi and others with the "torture" escapade. They knew full well what methods were being used at gitmo, and signed off on them. Now they want to prosecute those involved saying that they never knew what was going on, even though they received DAILY briefing on the subject at the time. Just more lies. obama supporters say that he is just trying to get this country back on its feet, yet ignore how he has bad-mouthed America on his recent trip to Europe. obama continually spouts that it is time to "remake" America, not rebuild, get it going again, not strengthen,...Rebuild. And his "vision" for the outcome is not a pretty one...nationalized banks, national healthcare, gov't owned manufacturing, gov't takeover of private businesses, a disarmed citizenry, amnesty of illegals, and the disslovement of our borders.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o4CwhkcRbbE
What will it take for the American people to wake up to the fact that they are losing their country, their constitution, and their freedom?
Are you suggesting overthrow of the government? After all, these people that are running the government were put there by the majority of the voters. I didn't vote for any of them, but they are there anyway, and out of loyalty to my country, I will stand by it until the next election. Hopefully the majority of the voters will see it differently by then. Meanwhile, I am not going to pull it down in the eyes of other countries by continually bitching about what they are trying to do.
It isn't my fingers, it is my keyboard. No way would my fingers make so many mistakes that have to be corrected.
Wilma, with all due respect, country and government are two totally different things. Thats why we have a Constitution, to limit the power of the government. Yes, a majoirty of the people did vote for them. They bought into the idea of hope and change without really looking past the propaganda, or skin tone. and a vast number of these voters had never voted before and probaly never will again.
Wilma, I reread your post and the line that keeps jumping out at me,
Quote from: Wilma on April 25, 2009, 09:01:00 AM
Meanwhile, I am not going to pull it down in the eyes of other countries by continually bitching about what they are trying to do.
So are you suggesting that we just let them do whatever they want? That we should just follow blindly and accept the dissolvement of the constitution? That we shouldn't speak out against it? That our only means of action is voting and hopefully we'll get a different result in 4 years?
I don't think that he is advocating overthrowing the government. I find it very interesting that when someone seems to want to say anything that may be viewed as negative towards Obama that person is not being fair to him. At what point will we (the people of this nation) stop saying that he needs more time and start worrying about what is going on? If no one talks about what is going, or pays attention to it, then how are we to know how to vote in the next election. Closing ours eyes to it won't work.
When you see a rattlesnake poised to strike, you do not wait until he has struck before you crush him. --Franklin D. Roosevelt
So how do you propose change? And I repeat, I am not going to denigrate my country or government in the eyes of our enemies.
Okay, so what do we do when the head of our gov't "deigrate" our country in the eyes of our enemies? Just trust they know what they are doing? Why is it okay for them to do it and not have to answer to anyone, while we have to just stand in line like good little sheep?
Just out of curiosity. I went back and looked up some reviews of Pres. Bush's first 100 days. Very interesting reading. Billy, were you old enough to vote for him then? Was that your first election? Go back and look at things that were happening then. 9-11 hadn't happened yet. He had chances to make mistakes just as any new president does. Several articles were written April 27,2001.
Unfortunately change does not come easy or on its own. I love my country and feel that it is worth watching over and wanting the best for. My government is another matter all together. Yes we did vote on our government, yes we vote for a president every four years, and yes the person in that perticular position should be given the chance to win over the people who didn't vote for him. The question becomes how much time is enough time? One may decide that 100 days is enough while another beleives that change will not come in four years so they vote for him again. The great thing about our diplomatic process is that it was created with the knowledge that it wasn't perfect.
We sit and listen to what the canidates have to tell us with the hope that they are telling the truth or at least not lying as much as the other guy. If, however we realize that we have made a mistake there are steps we can take to correct it. Being willing to just deal with it for four years is not the answer for fear of the amount of damage that can be done in that time.
What are the steps to correct it?
The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.
With that said it is left up to Congress to determine what is considered as high crimes and or misdemeanors. When the idea came to Impeach Bush a popularity poll was taken and 53% of the population did NOT want him impeached. So in turn the matter was overturned.
Don't be afraid to voice your true opinion if asked. It may not be much but its a start.
So, actually, impeachment proceedings could be started for any supposed crime and doesn't necessarily have to be proven as long as Congress will go along with it?
Darkangel, does your profile picture represent evil or despair? I hope it is despair.
This "first 100 days" business started with FDR who was trying to deal with some desperate situations.
Quote from: Wilma on April 25, 2009, 03:09:09 PM
So, actually, impeachment proceedings could be started for any supposed crime and doesn't necessarily have to be proven as long as Congress will go along with it?
To impeach means to bring charges against and have the "individual" answer to the accusations before a tribunal. IF the individual is impeached then tried and found to be guilty of these crimes then he or she can be convicted, sentenced and removed from office. Impeachment does not mean removal from office.
Wilma,
In answer to your question my pic is for despair
I am sorry. There are a lot of things I could say, but you probably know all of them already. There is one thing though. Go to the thread "April is Poetry Month" and read Pam's poem, then read David's response to it. It won't cure anything but it does make you feel better. I am high on optimism and low on pessisism. I believe that what you believe will happen, does happen. If an opportunity is missed, a better one comes along. Among us we can lift the whole world. Believe me?
For what it is worth, the world puts me into despair, too, but I just give it a finger and go on. Who needs it?
Diane, yes I was old enough to vote for him, but didn't. That is beside the point. Yes, Bush made mistakes, so what? That is not what obama is doing, he is selling out our country and constitution more and more everyday.
And that is one of the things that I am talking about. Everytime someone critizes Nobama the left fires back with "Well, Bush did it to..." instead of presenting anything factual to show that barrack programs are working or even going to work. Why, because they can't.
BECAUSE THEY HAVEN'T HAD TIME TO SHOW ANY RESULTS YET. The impatience of youth.
Like past adminstrations, this bunch will be claiming results that are
not attributed to them. And many will believe 'em too.
So the TRILLONS of dollars added to our debt without any benefits aren't a result, the weakening of our defenses isn't a result, nationalizing of healthcare, banks, private business etc, these aren't results???
Well no - they definitely will not attach themselves to
the negative results lthat you have mentioned.
Keep in mind that wealth will be created from the public debt
being run up by Bush, Obama et al.
My dictionary defines
result as "to follow as a consequence or effect"
Quote from: BillyakaVarmit on April 26, 2009, 08:24:12 AM
So the TRILLONS of dollars added to our debt without any benefits aren't a result, the weakening of our defenses isn't a result, nationalizing of healthcare, banks, private business etc, these aren't results???
These are not the results of the TRILLIONS of dollars. Whatever
follows the money is the result.
Well, lets see, the CONSEQUENCE of their spending had the EFFECT of adding TRILLIONS to our national debt..
is that better???
Whose spending? Don't tell me that Obama didn't have help from previous administrations and you don't want to wait for the results of his spending.
Whose spending?? Who was it that just recently printed a trillion dollars with nothing to back it? Who was it that monitized our debt?
Yes, Bush started the bailouts, we hear this daily, we know this. However, we also know that the Dem.'s won, and obama continues to spend. Where's the change we heard so much about??
Quote from: Wilma on April 26, 2009, 05:48:16 PM
Whose spending? Don't tell me that Obama didn't have help from previous administrations and you don't want to wait for the results of his spending.
The problem is that he's spending money we don't have. In other words he's printing money just like Germany did before WW2. All this is going to do is cause hyperinflation.
Oh yeah, I forgot to mention that the justice department under nobama threw out a lawsuit against iran by hostages from the US Embassy in Tehran 30 yrs ago. The adminstration said that the Algeris Accord precluded lawsuits. The hostages argue that legislation brought by the Bush admin. allows them to seek repreations. This on top of Iran jailing a U.S. reporter, saying that she is a spy, with basically no outcry from the current adminstration. Other than to call irans actions "deeply disapointing". I think you all know where my "deep disapointment" lays on this one. Iran basically kidnaps our citizens and yet we do nothing...welcome to the obamanation.
Just a thought here...Remember all that money we gave to GM, the billions of taxpayer dollars that we gave because they were just to big to fail. Well, other than filing for bankruptcy, the gov't and UAW unions now own 89% of General Motors. Thats right boys and girls our government is now offically in the automobile business. This same gov't who seems to think that we can spend our way out of debt is actually going to try running a business. A business they purchased with OUR money. Gee, do you think that we will ever see a dime of that in shareholder profits?? Well, I don't know about you, but I am not going to hold my breath waiting on that check.
They already tried running a business, the IRS could not make back the money owed them by the owner of the Mustang Ranch.
That's right, our fearsome leaders could not show a profit selling sex and booze.
You know, that is one area I would think that they could've made a fortune, espcially after all the practice they've had screwing the american public.
We will never get a dime back. Obama has now switched govt shares from preferred stock to common stock. Which means that we are officially not eligible to receive money anymore. It also means that the Govt officially has voting rights (control) within the company.
This was NEVER about saving jobs or saving the economy or keeping the companies from going under. If that were the case, they would have let them go into bankruptcy before taking ownership. This was about what it is ALWAYS about...... control and dependency. They knew bankruptcy was the best solution.... that is why they are pushing it forward now. BUT they wanted to swoop in and take ownership of the company when they had a chance, and a reason.
The nanny state wants to be able to dictate to us what cars we can and cannot drive. There is a political agenda here, people!
Rush (even though some of you don't like him) reported that in the company's viability report, there are 12 (if I remember right) brands within GM that are profitable.... half of them are trucks and SUVs...... All of those are slated to have their production ended. Now, if this were about making GM profitable again and giving back govt ownership of the company, why would you stop production of profitable products?
Political agenda. Plain and simple.
100 days of dismantling our American way of life.
100 days, and Specter the Defector just gave him a BIG present, a super majority. What did Specter get? King Zero's support in a bid for another term in the Senate, as a democrat.
Lovely. NOW what do we have to look forward to in the next 100, 200, 1200 days?
FRAUD! CHICAGO STYLE CORRUPTION IN THE WHITE HOUSE. When Obama said, "That's a pledge I will keep", we had proof positive he would not keep such a pledge.
Any time a candidate makes a promise, then follows it with a promise to actually keep that promise, how can you possibly believe him?
He just told you he would not otherwise keep the promise.
It's a bit like someone saying, "I'll be honest with you...", illustrating they are not otherwise honest.
I have many times found out that unguarded moments reveal much.
Arlen Specter is an old line politician. He was a Democrat, then went Repub. and now back to Democrat. He was Philly's DA back when. He'd pick you're political pocket if he could. Sometimes he's OK, but I don't trust him. And that's real old line politics. Ick!
As we say on the range.. You got a head shot on that one Diane..