Amen ... instead, we have a lot of Chicken Littles going around screaming that the sky is falling.

 

The sky IS falling, through the enormous hole in the ozone layer created by the 'fat cat' 'big oil' corporations.

What are your "conservative beliefs"?.

 

 

Like anything I say won't be shredded and disparaged by you. You're certainly welcome to read my views on several different topics. I'm not a silent person...my views are well documented.

The only place you are "just left of center" is in Bizarro World ...

 

Extreme may not be totally accurate, but the way you attack Obama on a regular basis certainly makes you look that way.

 

I really don't care. I don't like where I see Obama taking this country. When Obama does something that merits my kudos he will get them. I was set to do it on his decision that there would be no prosecutions over the so-called torture of terrorists but before I had a chance to he flopped. I will continue to point out what I believe are bad decisions on the part of this administration and the congress, that is still my right isn't it? Or has Obama eliminated some of those constitutional loopholes like the Bill of Rights?

Like anything I say won't be shredded and disparaged by you. You're certainly welcome to read my views on several different topics. I'm not a silent person...my views are well documented.

 

 

Thanks for the expected answer. I didn't think you had any real conservative beliefs. You have pretty much confirmed it.:laugh:

I really don't care. I don't like where I see Obama taking this country. When Obama does something that merits my kudos he will get them. I was set to do it on his decision that there would be no prosecutions over the so-called torture of terrorists but before I had a chance to he flopped. I will continue to point out what I believe are bad decisions on the part of this administration and the congress, that is still my right isn't it? Or has Obama eliminated some of those constitutional loopholes like the Bill of Rights?

 

Don't back off, All Tell. Continue to avoid stepping in the manure.

Why don't you answer the question rather then giving a PolySci lecture?

 

And FWIW Obama was elected running as a centrist with support of moderates of both parties but has taken a hard left since his election. Maybe just maybe Obama never had any intention of governing from the center. He certainly hasn't shown any intention of doing so thus far.

 

And I still would love to hear any of the Obamites explain how the Obama deal for government ownership of Chrysler isn't at least socialistic.

 

Futile my friend. I believe the Kool-Aide came with blinders and ear plugs.

Thanks for the expected answer. I didn't think you had any real conservative beliefs. You have pretty much confirmed it.:laugh:

 

 

Well, that shows how little you read of my posts. I don't owe you any explanations. If you're interested (and you're not), you'll do the research. You've made up your mind based on limited information. It's a wasted effort on my part to convince you otherwise. But, fear not...I'm not upset. There are plenty on here, even many I disagree with, who know I'm not as liberal as you'd like to paint me.

Per Wikipedia:

 

"Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating public or state ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equality for all individuals, with an egalitarian method of compensation."

 

Just to fan the flames a bit.

Per Wikipedia:

 

"Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating public or state ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and a society characterized by equality for all individuals, with an egalitarian method of compensation."

 

Just to fan the flames a bit.

 

Isn't that like running a fan in a hurricane? :lol:

Some ask for info to support that Obama is a socialist, it is in the news every day. The takeover of the banks and car companies for a start. The effort to take over the health care indusrty. The need for the next Supreme Court nominee to have "empathy" for a variety of groups. What he is saying is he needs the Constitution to be re-interpretted to change America into a socialist nation. I have read the Constitution and there is nothing about "empathy". Obama cares not what the Founding Fathers wrote, what he wants is a document that he can twist any old way when needed. Just because you wish to ignore the facts do not make them go away.

Some ask for info to support that Obama is a socialist, it is in the news every day. The takeover of the banks and car companies for a start.

Didn't this bailout stuff start with the previous administration?

 

I'm not very happy with it, either, but in some cases the powers that be have decided it's preferable to huge companies going bankrupt and tens of thousands of Americans ending up on the unemployment rolls.

Obama cares not what the Founding Fathers wrote, what he wants is a document that he can twist any old way when needed. Just because you wish to ignore the facts do not make them go away.

And just because you interpret Obama's comments and actions a certain (very predictable) way doesn't mean you're right, either.

Some ask for info to support that Obama is a socialist, it is in the news every day. The takeover of the banks and car companies for a start. The effort to take over the health care indusrty. The need for the next Supreme Court nominee to have "empathy" for a variety of groups. What he is saying is he needs the Constitution to be re-interpretted to change America into a socialist nation. I have read the Constitution and there is nothing about "empathy". Obama cares not what the Founding Fathers wrote, what he wants is a document that he can twist any old way when needed. Just because you wish to ignore the facts do not make them go away.

 

1) He hasn't taken over the banks or the auto industry. For one thing, the bailouts were begun BEFORE he became president. For another, the companies and banks can/could refuse the money and fix themselves. (See Ford).

 

2) Not sure what you mean about the take over of the health care industry. I've been really busy the last two weeks, but I haven't seen anything about that.

 

3) About the Supreme court appointee...he hasn't said anything of the sort. You are projecting YOUR interpretation of what YOU think Obama wants. He wants an empathetic SCJ. Empathetic does not equate to constitutionally malleable.

Didn't this bailout stuff start with the previous administration?

 

I'm not very happy with it, either, but in some cases the powers that be have decided it's preferable to huge companies going bankrupt and tens of thousands of Americans ending up on the unemployment rolls.

And just because you interpret Obama's comments and actions a certain (very predictable) way doesn't mean you're right, either.

 

Bush did reach across the aisle. And he was wrong as well.

Chrysler is still filing bankruptcy with this so-called bailout program and workers are being laid off.

Why do you think a judge needs "empathy"? I believe the job of the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution, not provide a feeling of what they think the Constitution should be in their minds. If they want to change the Constitution the way to do it is to amend the Constitution, but they know they will not be able to that. So they want to hi-jack the Constittution and make-up laws because of feelings.

Bush did reach across the aisle. And he was wrong as well.

Chrysler is still filing bankruptcy with this so-called bailout program and workers are being laid off.

Why do you think a judge needs "empathy"? I believe the job of the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution, not provide a feeling of what they think the Constitution should be in their minds. If they want to change the Constitution the way to do it is to amend the Constitution, but they know they will not be able to that. So they want to hi-jack the Constittution and make-up laws because of feelings.

Ease up on the talking points ...

1) He hasn't taken over the banks or the auto industry. For one thing, the bailouts were begun BEFORE he became president. For another, the companies and banks can/could refuse the money and fix themselves. (See Ford).

 

2) Not sure what you mean about the take over of the health care industry. I've been really busy the last two weeks, but I haven't seen anything about that.

 

3) About the Supreme court appointee...he hasn't said anything of the sort. You are projecting YOUR interpretation of what YOU think Obama wants. He wants an empathetic SCJ. Empathetic does not equate to constitutionally malleable.

 

The word is about feelings. Obama wants someone who will not allow 'original intent' or historical interpretations stand in their way of making malleable decisions. FDR eventually loaded the Supreme Court with liberals and we are now facing a government that has been allowed to grow over the past 70 years that has given us our current mess, an oversized government. This may or may not have been their intent 70 years ago, but it is what we have, a bloated uncontrollable overspending government. There is no 1 law that put us in this position, it was an accumalation of growth a government that is inefficient, hurts creativity and wastes money.

 

Before you argue about a need to regulate business, there is a need. Yet everytime something goes bad, you do not need more laws. There were many laws to help avoid the worst of this mess, they just were not enforced or you had a B. Frank messing with business forcing them to make loans that they did not want to make. By the way, many of the banks were forced to take money, as they were in good shape and didn't want the money.