Trailer for the upcoming 'Fall of the Republic: The Presidency of Barack Obama'

I cant stand Alex Jones. It's my own personal taste.

What he did to Michelle Malkin was disgusting

Originally posted by VinceP1974
I cant stand Alex Jones. It's my own personal taste.

What he did to Michelle Malkin was disgusting

There are things he has done which have been wrong. Don't think that I agree with everything he has said, or says and has done.

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse

Originally posted by VinceP1974
I cant stand Alex Jones. It's my own personal taste.

What he did to Michelle Malkin was disgusting

There are things he has done which have been wrong. Don't think that I agree with everything he has said, or says and has done.

I respect other people listening to him.

reply to post by VinceP1974


Vince,
I can only take him for short periods myself. He has great researchers though so he does hit some good points about our present situation. What he did to Ms Malkin was criminal. The lady is on our side and understands the problems much better than he ever could!

Zindo

Originally posted by ElectricUniverse
BTW, the statement I made about you needing to do some more research does not mean that i dismiss you, or think any less of you. It is just a statement of fact.

There are plenty of things that I don't know too, and that if I was to respond to i would need to do research on them.

I don't pretend to know it all, yet you dismissed anything I said as valid. Somehow when you dismissed what I said, you are the one who think you know more and had the right tell me to go research.

If you approached it more as something that we can research together, then perhaps your statement wouldn't look so arrogant. Given you statement above how you regard it as 'fact' only solidifies your arrogance.

Somehow you think democracy means majority rule, and you based your facts on quotes.

Fine, that is your opinion. I didn't say you are wrong. I didn't twist your words. I just got down to the point... the bottomline.

The scenario you gave of majority rule, like Jefferson, is called 'the tyranny of the majority', which is consider to be not a democracy. Surely, Jefferson though democracy meant that people got to vote. That is a common mistake. An election is not the factor by which a democracy is determined.

The factor that determines a democracy is 'the will of the people'. Some simply say that means every individual has the right to effect change within there government. Therefore, it is about freedom. When the 'majority rules', it is not a democracy because that means they rule-out the minority as unable to make a change. There are several ways to make change besides a majority vote.

You actually think that if a sniper was caught trying to kill any past president he would have been let go?... There are, and have been for a long time laws in place that would put such a person, or people in prison.

Where? In the U.S.? Now think about it, I gave an easy example. The President is said to leave the country and travel to other places. What laws prevent people in other from doing the same?

And you wonder why people sit in Gitmo.

What President Obama is talking about is completely different.

What Obama said (that isn't so cut-up from that video) is that he wants to give those people in Gitmo the rule of law. He says he wants to establish laws to move the people from Gitmo into the states in order to give them a trial... and people like AJ go nuts and scream that Obama is being unfair. Oh wow!

'nuff said

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
Vince,
I can only take him for short periods myself. He has great researchers though so he does hit some good points about our present situation. What he did to Ms Malkin was criminal. The lady is on our side and understands the problems much better than he ever could!

Zindo

Same here, there are times that he just goes off the rocker, such as the time that he went to Chavez and asked him for help to find the truth behind 9/11...

He also gets annoying and disrespectful towards some people as Vince pointed out with Malkin.



[edit on 25-8-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

reply to post by dzonatas



Wow, so now I am arrogant for pointing out facts...that's a new one...
Not only that but you dismiss much of what is said by twisting facts and then you get angry when peple said you should research things instead of just jumping into the bandwagon blindly?...

Yeah 'nuff said...

Oh and btw, as another member pointed out your example is a bad one. Perhaps if you started to admit when you are wrong people might start taking you more seriously instead of making red herrings every time you are wrong, as you seem to be doing.



[edit on 25-8-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

One more thing...those quotes which you seem to be dismissing so easily come from one of the founding fathers of the Republic of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, and a man that is respected by many Americans from all sides of the political spectrum, Ron Paul.

And are you saying the United States should be making the laws of other countries?

The statements made by President Obama on "indefinite preventive detention" again has nothing to do with your statements. Why do you keep trying to make red herrings?

[edit on 25-8-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by ZindoDoone
reply to post by VinceP1974

 

Vince,
I can only take him for short periods myself. He has great researchers though so he does hit some good points about our present situation. What he did to Ms Malkin was criminal. The lady is on our side and understands the problems much better than he ever could!

Zindo

It's kinda how I am with Michael Savage. There's very few (factual) things that he says that I found to be disagreeing with.. but sometimes he says it with such rage that for my own mental well being i have to turn it off.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


Hello? Nobody has attempted to do what you accuse, yet you have me convinced that you are pretty good to tear into anybody and try to find fault where there really is no fault.

You even said "mob rule is anarchy". Democracy isn't an anarchy, yet you also claimed democracy is mob rule. Something contradicts itself there.

Actually, what clear is you don't want to acknowledge other people's opinion or beliefs.

You don't have to believe me. I certainly don't force you to believe me. Sorry you feel intimidated because there are people that don't exactly think the way you do.

Google search for "democracy" doesn't have anything about 'mob rule' as a definition. I'm not the only one that doesn't think like you.

Maybe you can watch this video, which pretty much censors Obama, like Maddok did....

Lighten up, k?

Unnecessary Censorship

reply to post by dzonatas


It's almost traditional in America to equate the notion of strict majority rule with "mob rule".

reply to post by dzonatas


The thread was started to discuss the new Obama film by AJ, the off topic banter about what AJ does our doesn't personally believe seems like pointless meandering and has gotten what could have been a productive thread off track....hopefully it finds its way back. I listen to AJ alot and disagree alot with how he presents his research. Nonetheless his research IS top notch and overall I think he means well for this country. The Obama Deception was just ok for me, I liked End Game much better. Hopefully the new Obama film has the makings for reaching a broader audience then even the Obama Deception.

reply to post by VinceP1974


Yup, Doc Savage can be as grating as sand paper on your eyeball most times. Specially lately with his fight with the UK. Like you said, he does not hold pack for anyone and i do respect him for that much!
Zindo

Is this what this means?

my friend tells me that she overheard someone say they are going to break into my house so I call the police. They arrest this person and hold him in jail indefinetly without any proof he was going to do this to me.
He hasn't committed a crime.

Is this what it means?

I might check it out. In my opinion it's a little biased against Obama. US has been heading this way for a very long time and Obama is just the latest puppet. Of course the reason to target him specifically is that he promised change and then after voted in he broke that promise. Now people are starting to realize that it doesn't matter who sits on the throne when the people who pull all the strings are still the same. I think Alex should make it abundantly clear for everyone that it is not only Obama who is at fault here.

Originally posted by VinceP1974
reply to post by dzonatas

 

It's almost traditional in America to equate the notion of strict majority rule with "mob rule".

She/he is not going to admit that she/he was wrog. I am beginning to wonder why she/he keeps trying to derail the thread by making red herrings instead of admitting she/he was wrong.

Not only that, now she/he wants to derail the thread posting a video of what President Obama CLAIMS he wants to do with healthcare...

reply to post by MagicaRose



It could mean that yes. Watch the second video I gave, which again is from a left wing reporter, and you can see and hear what this is all about.


Here is the link.

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 25-8-2009 by ElectricUniverse]

Originally posted by PsykoOps
I might check it out. In my opinion it's a little biased against Obama. US has been heading this way for a very long time and Obama is just the latest puppet. Of course the reason to target him specifically is that he promised change and then after voted in he broke that promise. Now people are starting to realize that it doesn't matter who sits on the throne when the people who pull all the strings are still the same. I think Alex should make it abundantly clear for everyone that it is not only Obama who is at fault here.

What in the world does "biased against Obama" mean? Any objective American will be "biased against Obama" by looking at the facts of his life.

He didn't break his promise about Change. The people were too stupid to ask "what kind of change?"

Well he's a Marxist. That's the change he's bringing.

Originally posted by VinceP1974

Originally posted by PsykoOps
I might check it out. In my opinion it's a little biased against Obama. US has been heading this way for a very long time and Obama is just the latest puppet. Of course the reason to target him specifically is that he promised change and then after voted in he broke that promise. Now people are starting to realize that it doesn't matter who sits on the throne when the people who pull all the strings are still the same. I think Alex should make it abundantly clear for everyone that it is not only Obama who is at fault here.

What in the world does "biased against Obama" mean? Any objective American will be "biased against Obama" by looking at the facts of his life.

He didn't break his promise about Change. The people were too stupid to ask "what kind of change?"

Well he's a Marxist. That's the change he's bringing.

Watch it, the next thing that will happen is that you will be called a racist for criticizing obama - by the very same people that said obama's election would transcend race in America. As for me, since obama is 50% white, I'm directing any futher criticisms of obama towards only his white half ...

[edit on 8/26/2009 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by centurion1211

Watch it, the next thing that will happen is that you will be called a racist for criticizing obama - by the very same people that said obama's election would transcend race in America. As for me, since obama is 50% white, I'm directing any futher criticisms of obama towards only his white half ...

[edit on 8/26/2009 by centurion1211]

I hate his white Communist family too