In response to:

Obama's Definition of 'Liberty'

M444ss Wrote: Jan 23, 2013 1:52 PM
Based on your comments here and your apparent support for Mr Obama, I find it hard to believe you were ever a Republican. Given that your alleged move away from the Republican Party is due to Republicans being "such liars," I assume you also disavow the Democratic Party, which is demonstrably full of liars who believe that any lie is justified if it achieves the political and social ends they deem appropriate. And certainly, it is easily demonstarted that Mr Obama doesn't really beleive the statements you quoted ("Our celebration of initiative and enterprise..." Really??) So, as a "former Republican" what political party or theory do you now support?
worker Wrote: Jan 23, 2013 4:49 PM
Less dangerous??? Are you kidding???
Donjindra Wrote: Jan 23, 2013 4:01 PM
I voted for Obama twice. I take no pleasure in it. I voted for Nixon too. I take no pleasure in that either. The problem is, there aren't many politicians one can be proud to vote for. The best vote I ever cast was for Reagan. But I feel like I've been forced to vote against Republicans since Clinton's second term. The sad fact it, Democrats are screwy too but less dangerous.

Oh, how far-removed we are from what now seems like the "innocent" Bill Clinton days when all we had to worry about was the various definitions of the word "is". And now, after watching President Obama's second term inaugural address, it is clear we have a president who calls into question the meaning of the word "liberty."

It is incomprehensible that this former constitutional lawyer would argue during his speech that America has evolved to the extent "our founding documents" no longer require us to "define liberty in exactly the same way." But then again, it's not so far-fetched considering what...