1 - 10 Next
I thought his religion was "'Narcissism".
Want to guess what percentage of those 'too many ignorant people' cast votes for Mr. Obama's RE-ELECTION in 2012 and what percentage they were of the total votes cast for him and other liberals who are in office? BTW, 'ignorant' means lacking knowledge' and does not necessarily mean 'stupid' - although one CAN BE BOTH 'ignorant' and 'stupid'.
In response to:

Obama the Unwitting Recruiter

OldTimer Wrote: Feb 20, 2015 1:06 PM
It seems that Obama's Administration has declared war -- on sanity and common sense.
In response to:

Obama the Unwitting Recruiter

OldTimer Wrote: Feb 20, 2015 9:46 AM
Giuliani -- not Giulaiana or Giulani
In response to:

Obama the Unwitting Recruiter

OldTimer Wrote: Feb 20, 2015 9:18 AM
Mr. Giulaiana has voiced an opinion that Mr. Obama does not love America, an opinion obviously shared by Mr. Obama who admittedly has declared he wanted to fundamentally transform America. Of course, even though marriage counsellors advise that if you love someone you should not try to drastically change that person, the Democrats have their skivvies in a twist over Mr. Giulani's observation -- which when coupled with all that Mr. Obama has done or attempted to to -- seems to be a rather accurate observation. I do not believe that Mr. Obama is 'unwitting' in his tendency to be an apologist' for the self-identified 'Islamic' terrorists. What the devil does he think the first "I" in ISIS or ISIL stands for" Ice cream?
I have often wondered how 'equal protection under the law' and Amendemnt 13 prohibition on 'involuntary servitude' except as 'punishment on conviction of a crime' does not prevent government from passing 'debt' on to future generations and even to those who do not benefit from the expenditures that are the root cause of such 'debt'. Of course, I am sure some 'progressive' can find a 'compelling government interest' on a majority of 1 federal judicial decision. So much of 'government, policy' --including legislation, regulations and court decisions, usually as contrived by Democrat politicians -- seem to be a War on Sanity and Common Sense, not just 'economic' sanity.
Don't be off-putting Democrats for their 'choice' of candidate. After all, look what happened when the primary qualification of their candidate was "partly black". It is my belief that most of those who vote for Democrats are not looking for handouts, not good government, The one who offers the best bribes seems to have the edge.
Whether one believes that 'rights' come from God or 'nature' it is rather clear that they do not come from other people, hence NOT from politicians or 'government'.
"Does he really believe that man is responsible for bestowing rights, and can therefore take those rights away as he sees fit?" It seems that most people who claim to be 'Democrats' and even many who claim to be 'Republicans' DO believe that. It is also the basis for the 'Living Constitution' theory, which also contraicet Blackstone. Does anyone remember the SOTUS decision that decided that 'quotas' were 'Constitutional' for the present but might not have been in 25 years? I believe that it was Grutter v. Bollinger. In any event, 'government' can insert a 'compelling government interest' in almost anything that 'government' chooses and we can even find that some decisions might be 'tailored' to suit politics of the day, possibly like the 'Obamacare' decision and the 'Kelo v. New London' decision. In addition, eith the scope of 'judicial review' of MARBURY v. MADISON, NO LAW OR DECISION IS 'SETTLED LAW'. Specious and flawed 'rationale' can twist and turn any law into what is CALLED 'Constitutional', when in fact it is totally contrary to the very intent of the protections the Founders tried to write into the Constitution and Bill of Rights -- that is EXTREMELY LIMITED GOVERNMENT POWER. The 'Executive Order' attempts by Mr. Obama to relegate Congress to toothless politicians when they didn't pass laws he wanted is also an example of a person seeking to replace 'God' or any other limitation on 'government power'. So it matters little whether it is a super majority in Congress or a simple majority in the courts or an individual in the White House, the usurpation of powers they were never intended to have has become pretty much 'business as usual' when liberals (irrespective of political party) hold the controlling positions of legislative, enforcement or interpretation power.
In response to:

The President Who Doesn't Get It

OldTimer Wrote: Feb 18, 2015 4:36 PM
Maybe it is the fawning sycophants who don't get it. After all, how is it that so many didn't question his ties to Muslims and Islam BEFORE he even became a candidate with almost total absence of a 'background', and yet what little negative information WAS known was pooh poohed and those who questioned his 'credentials' were called racists or even loonies? Remember his promise of a 'fundamental transformation' of America -- with no promise that it would be BETTER than it had been? Look at America today, not only from the eyes of different political parties, but in the eyes of the world. I often think of Vidkun Quisling.and what he did to his country.
1 - 10 Next