Letter to obama on Constitutional rights

[fj1200]

As evidence by you often snarky replies and abbreviated "for effect" re-postings of their words no doubt. --Tyr

Nope, I have a higher opinion, of most anyway, that they have the ability to fully comprehend the whys and wherefores. Unless you're alleging I broke the rules of course.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Nope, I have a higher opinion, of most anyway, that they have the ability to fully comprehend the whys and wherefores. Unless you're alleging I broke the rules of course.

I did not even mention any rules..

A classic example of snide or snarky remark is this little caveat ,bolded and enlarged in your quoted words above. Notice, I quoted the entire reply and did not edit for effect by leaving out words..--Tyr

[fj1200]

I did not even mention any rules..

Correct.

A classic example of snide or snarky remark is this little caveat ,bolded and enlarged in your quoted words above. Notice, I quoted the entire reply and did not edit for effect by leaving out words..--Tyr

One man's snark is another man's disclaimer I suppose. Nevertheless I'm not sure why you're upset about this.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Back on topic.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/...ter_obama.html

September 20, 2013

February 6, 2012
America after Obama
By Jeff Lukens

Barack Obama has gone from the "one we've been waiting for" to the one we can't wait to kick out. No one ever thought one man could bring the nation to its knees, but here he is living in the White House. And on our knees we have been, praying for the day when he leaves.

The audacity of a president hell-bent on destroying our great nation has truly been a stunning spectacle to observe. No lie is too ridiculous to tell about anyone who opposes him. With a compliant media behind him, the smears this demagogue-in-chief promises to unleash on his opponent this fall could divide the county so badly that it becomes ungovernable.

The societal tensions Obama promised to ease have worsened by his politics of envy. The racial healing he promised has fallen flat, leaving only a worse divide. Despite overwhelming opposition, he forced a health plan on the people that few want. He has trampled on the Constitution and infringed on powers granted to Congress. He has bailed out auto companies, investment bankers, and insurance companies. He has given constitutional rights to terrorists.

Obama's greatest transgression, however, has been the explosion of government spending to the point where we are enslaved to a mountain of debt that can never be repaid. He has given us $1.6-trillion deficits and will have added more than $6 trillion to the debt by the end of his term. He has raised the percentage of GDP consumed by government to 25 percent. And all his spending has stimulated nothing.

If you believe what the government reports, total unemployment is currently 15.2 percent as measured by U-6. During Obama's tenure, true unemployment has been running greater than 20 percent and is near Depression-era levels. In sum, Obama's presidency has hastened a financial disaster upon the nation.

Obama calls his policies "transformation." In an earlier age, they would have been considered something akin to treason. Our enemies could not have planted someone to have caused more damage. And now, with financial collapse on the horizon, our very way of life is threatened.

Altogether, Barack Obama will probably go down in history as the worst president of all time. Until now, historians have long given that dubious distinction to James Buchanan, who left office to Abraham Lincoln as the nation was falling apart and headed toward civil war. It is no exaggeration to say


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/...#ixzz2hKmCOLvC
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Lots to consider from that article.. And our enemies did plant....... -Tyr

[Drummond]

Is that written by you or someone else? Hard to tell since it's quoted but without reference.

Just catching up with the contents of this thread.

Arbo, I'm enjoying your challenge to Tyr about the source of his post. I mean ... are you for real ??

Only recently, I identified the source of a large chunk of text that YOU had posted, as something NOT original, but taken from a TV series, Did you cite its origin, show any willingness to acknowledge where it came from, before I posted on it myself ?

YOU DID NOT ... yet, here you are, questioning Tyr on HIS contribution !!!!

Truly amazing ....

I for one have no difficulty in accepting Tyr's work as his own, and I would only question a post's 'bona fides' with good reason to do so ... and you had none.

Tyr's post is an excellent one, in my opinion, and to say the least, deserved.

.. and why am I not surprised that you and FJ want to be critical of it ? For supposed NON Lefties, you folks do an awful lot of defending the Trot-In-Chief, do you not ??

Oh, and before you ask, every word here is my own. If or when I've something to quote, I SUPPLY CITATION AS TO WHERE IT CAME FROM.

A pity that you can't always say the same ... eh ?

[Drummond]

NEXT--


I AM SAVING THIS TO SEND DIRECTLY TO THAT SOB!!! First Obama U.S. drone strike may be on me but ff him!! I've bout' had enough of that SOB... --Tyr

[Arbo]

Arbo, I'm enjoying your challenge to Tyr about the source of his post.

Thank god we separated ourselves from your kind so long ago. I asked if they were his f'in words or those of someone else because he has them in a quote (which is odd) and he didn't sign them as he usually does.

Quit being a worthless tard.

[fj1200]

Tyr's post is an excellent one, in my opinion, and to say the least, deserved.

.. and why am I not surprised that you and FJ want to be critical of it ? For supposed NON Lefties, you folks do an awful lot of defending the Trot-In-Chief, do you not ??

Excellent coming from a right-wing rantical I suppose. I want to be critical of it because it does nothing to address any problem. Nevertheless you could point out where I, or Arbo for that matter, have defended the "TiC." BTW, defending truth is not defending the POTUS.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Just catching up with the contents of this thread.

Arbo, I'm enjoying your challenge to Tyr about the source of his post. I mean ... are you for real ??

Only recently, I identified the source of a large chunk of text that YOU had posted, as something NOT original, but taken from a TV series, Did you cite its origin, show any willingness to acknowledge where it came from, before I posted on it myself ?

YOU DID NOT ... yet, here you are, questioning Tyr on HIS contribution !!!!

Truly amazing ....

I for one have no difficulty in accepting Tyr's work as his own, and I would only question a post's 'bona fides' with good reason to do so ... and you had none.

Tyr's post is an excellent one, in my opinion, and to say the least, deserved.

.. and why am I not surprised that you and FJ want to be critical of it ? For supposed NON Lefties, you folks do an awful lot of defending the Trot-In-Chief, do you not ??

Oh, and before you ask, every word here is my own. If or when I've something to quote, I SUPPLY CITATION AS TO WHERE IT CAME FROM.

A pity that you can't always say the same ... eh ?

Had I quoted another's person's words I would have shown who's words I quoted. IF I SIGN MY NAME OR EVEN WHEN I DO NOT SIGN MY NAME IT'S MY WORDS UNLESS I GIVE REFERENCE THAT THE WORDS BELONG TO SOMEBODY ELSE. Some here like to question my words by any lousy means they can think of instead of attempting to refute the words they like to attack the author or question if the words were stolen! As if I can not present such posts after having done so here many times over. I may be no great wordsmith but by God I do get my point across with very little doubt about it! Only a very select few here have ever attempted to say I steal from others . My thread titled, I Take My Stand has a great opening post of which every word is mine. I AM PROUD OF THAT OPENING POST AND THAT ENTIRE THREAD BECAUSE IT DREW THE WOLVES TO ATTACK ME FOR DARING TO PRESENT A GREAT TRUTH AND MY REFUSING TO EVER BACK AWAY FROM THAT GREAT TRUTH.. As we are in the very midst of a great undeclared war being waged upon us and aided by our own government against us!--Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Excellent coming from a right-wing rantical I suppose. I want to be critical of it because it does nothing to address any problem. Nevertheless you could point out where I, or Arbo for that matter, have defended the "TiC." BTW, defending truth is not defending the POTUS.

Excellent coming from a right-wing rantical I suppose. I want to be critical of it because it does nothing to address any problem.

Sure, pointing out the truth serves no purpose, right? According to some it serves no purpose unless one can and does give the solution. Yet the first step to solving any problem has to be in recognizing and accepting that the problem exists in the first place. The left is great at pretending the problems created by their insanity are fictional when we know they are real. Libs, dems and leftists love their damn fantasies but me I prefer truth and reality! Our nation faces two great problems , first with the Islamists and second with their ally the globalists. Obama is the result of that alliance and his policies have been a great disaster to this nation and his next years on the throne will only magnify that many fold. -Tyr

[Drummond]

Thank god we separated ourselves from your kind so long ago. I asked if they were his f'in words or those of someone else because he has them in a quote (which is odd) and he didn't sign them as he usually does.

Quit being a worthless tard.

Thanks for your amusing response.

I'm a 'worthless tard', am I ? Really ?

Evidently my post struck home, then. Fact is, Arbo, that you've been critical of Tyr for behaviour you supposedly only had a SUSPICION of, that very behaviour being something that WAS TRUE OF YOU IN A PREVIOUS POST ELSEWHERE ON THIS FORUM !

Arbo, to be very clear on this: I don't address this to the rest of America. But where you're concerned, Arbo, I too am happy that 'we' separated ourselves from YOUR kind long ago.

I hope my meaning is clear to you.

And I shall continue to post as I, myself, choose, thanks very much. 'Disapprove' if you must, that is your right ... but don't expect that I must, or ever will, be swayed by opinions and gratuitous jibes which - if we're being honest here - are agenda-driven. Just as you categorise me as being on the 'Right' - which I proudly am - you, Arbo, are a creature of the Left (to what precise extent remains undetermined, but most certainly you ARE, comparatively speaking). You're taking a side, as am I. And, in taking that side, you launch into personal attacks because you've often no better recourse open to you.

But then ... MY side is the superior one, so, that's only to be expected. Isn't it ? Which brings me to a point I've been considering - are debates with you worth having ? You are too keen to launch into personalised attacks, and you do so in place of reasoned debate all too often, it seems to me. OK, so you're arguing from a fundamentally weak and ultimately disreputable position of unsupportable 'Leftieness', that's a 'given' ... but since that's the case, and often very transparently so, why not just concede to superior ideology, and be done with it ?

Give it some thought, Arbo. [If your agenda will permit you to, that is.]

[Drummond]

Had I quoted another's person's words I would have shown who's words I quoted. IF I SIGN MY NAME OR EVEN WHEN I DO NOT SIGN MY NAME IT'S MY WORDS UNLESS I GIVE REFERENCE THAT THE WORDS BELONG TO SOMEBODY ELSE. Some here like to question my words by any lousy means they can think of instead of attempting to refute the words they like to attack the author or question if the words were stolen! As if I can not present such posts after having done so here many times over. I may be no great wordsmith but by God I do get my point across with very little doubt about it! Only a very select few here have ever attempted to say I steal from others . My thread titled, I Take My Stand has a great opening post of which every word is mine. I AM PROUD OF THAT OPENING POST AND THAT ENTIRE THREAD BECAUSE IT DREW THE WOLVES TO ATTACK ME FOR DARING TO PRESENT A GREAT TRUTH AND MY REFUSING TO EVER BACK AWAY FROM THAT GREAT TRUTH.. As we are in the very midst of a great undeclared war being waged upon us and aided by our own government against us!--Tyr

What's abundantly clear to me, Tyr, is that you're a great patriot who speaks from the heart, whose passion for the good of his nation SHOULD earn much respect. OK ... there will be those who'll take opposing positions, because some measure of opposition is no less than inevitable.

But what's also inevitable is the ultimate exposure of the inferior, damaging, even outright pernicious character of that opposition. Through reasoned debate, this can be brought into the light of day, and the truth given all the airing it needs for something truly great to follow.

You do great service to your country in continuing as you do, Tyr, and your friendship is a real privilege to have. And let other loyal AMERICANS come forward in comparable recognition of that service !

[Drummond]

Excellent coming from a right-wing rantical I suppose. I want to be critical of it because it does nothing to address any problem. Nevertheless you could point out where I, or Arbo for that matter, have defended the "TiC." BTW, defending truth is not defending the POTUS.

I daresay that, if I could be bothered, I could do a little resesarch and come up with specific examples.

But I don't even need to, because your argument is self-defeating just as it stands, which is more than enough to settle the issue. You, FJ, repeatedly and consistently set yourself in opposition against those who'd be critical of Obama and his ilk. That you try, weakly so at that, to disguise such a position by offering diversionary argumentation (and often not even that: you just post 'put-downs', instead ...) isn't ultimately convincing: the very fact of sustained opposition to the Left's enemies ITSELF shows where your sympathies lie.

Does that all constitute a defence of the "TiC" ? Most certainly ! By trying to slap down, or discredit his opposition, and perpetually, how DOESN'T IT ?

I needn't say more. This is one of those occasions, FJ, where your position is such a weak one that it doesn't merit further time taken up with it.

[Missileman]

I daresay that, if I could be bothered, I could do a little resesarch and come up with specific examples.

In reality, you couldn't.

But I don't even need to, because your argument is self-defeating just as it stands, which is more than enough to settle the issue. You, FJ, repeatedly and consistently set yourself in opposition against those who'd be critical of Obama and his ilk. That you try, weakly so at that, to disguise such a position by offering diversionary argumentation (and often not even that: you just post 'put-downs', instead ...) isn't ultimately convincing: the very fact of sustained opposition to the Left's enemies ITSELF shows where your sympathies lie.

Does that all constitute a defence of the "TiC" ? Most certainly ! By trying to slap down, or discredit his opposition, and perpetually, how DOESN'T IT ?

I needn't say more. This is one of those occasions, FJ, where your position is such a weak one that it doesn't merit further time taken up with it.

There are a few posters here, myself included who are outraged by the crap being pulled by Obama, who want to weed out the distractions and go after Obama on legal grounds. There are things that make him a lousy president (golf, vacations, unwillingness to negotiate, economic retard, etc.) and there are things that could make him an impeachable president (Benghazi, Fast and Furious, IRS, selective law enforcement, etc.)

The liberal media is using attacks on Obama for the shit that makes him a lousy president to distract from the real meat and potatoes and they are using it to discredit all who oppose Obama. It also doesn't help when folks latch onto untrue stories, like the one about Obama keeping a Mosque open out of his own pocket. We need to stay focused on the potentially illegal and hopefully they will gain some traction with the rest of Americans.

[fj1200]

Sure, pointing out the truth serves no purpose, right?

There was no truth in your OP, only rant.

Thanks for your amusing response.

I'm a 'worthless tard', am I ? Really ?

Evidently my post struck home, then. Fact is, Arbo, that you've been critical of Tyr for behaviour you supposedly only had a SUSPICION of, that very behaviour being something that WAS TRUE OF YOU IN A PREVIOUS POST ELSEWHERE ON THIS FORUM !

Arbo, to be very clear on this: I don't address this to the rest of America. But where you're concerned, Arbo, I too am happy that 'we' separated ourselves from YOUR kind long ago.

I hope my meaning is clear to you.

And I shall continue to post as I, myself, choose, thanks very much. 'Disapprove' if you must, that is your right ... but don't expect that I must, or ever will, be swayed by opinions and gratuitous jibes which - if we're being honest here - are agenda-driven. Just as you categorise me as being on the 'Right' - which I proudly am - you, Arbo, are a creature of the Left (to what precise extent remains undetermined, but most certainly you ARE, comparatively speaking). You're taking a side, as am I. And, in taking that side, you launch into personal attacks because you've often no better recourse open to you.

But then ... MY side is the superior one, so, that's only to be expected. Isn't it ? Which brings me to a point I've been considering - are debates with you worth having ? You are too keen to launch into personalised attacks, and you do so in place of reasoned debate all too often, it seems to me. OK, so you're arguing from a fundamentally weak and ultimately disreputable position of unsupportable 'Leftieness', that's a 'given' ... but since that's the case, and often very transparently so, why not just concede to superior ideology, and be done with it ?

Give it some thought, Arbo. [If your agenda will permit you to, that is.]

I daresay that, if I could be bothered, I could do a little resesarch and come up with specific examples.

But I don't even need to, because your argument is self-defeating just as it stands, which is more than enough to settle the issue. You, FJ, repeatedly and consistently set yourself in opposition against those who'd be critical of Obama and his ilk. That you try, weakly so at that, to disguise such a position by offering diversionary argumentation (and often not even that: you just post 'put-downs', instead ...) isn't ultimately convincing: the very fact of sustained opposition to the Left's enemies ITSELF shows where your sympathies lie.

Does that all constitute a defence of the "TiC" ? Most certainly ! By trying to slap down, or discredit his opposition, and perpetually, how DOESN'T IT ?

I needn't say more. This is one of those occasions, FJ, where your position is such a weak one that it doesn't merit further time taken up with it.

Do you know how many times I've asked for examples? So far it's been a dry well for those looking. It would also be helpful if you knew what/who my posts were in opposition to.