Overthrow the democratically elected president, "how patriotic"

reply to post by Stylez


Boy you are sure a piece of work. We'll just go with the last post on here. From the Declaration of Independence. When the government becomes destructive to the people, they people have a right to remove it. And I think it's rather pathetic you have come down to name calling to try and get your point across. In any case you still won't receive any apology and I am laughing at you for getting so bent out of shape and being an internet tough guy its quite pathetic.

Originally posted by bigshow
reply to post by Stylez

 

Boy you are sure a piece of work. We'll just go with the last post on here. From the Declaration of Independence. When the government becomes destructive to the people, they people have a right to remove it. And I think it's rather pathetic you have come down to name calling to try and get your point across. In any case you still won't receive any apology and I am laughing at you for getting so bent out of shape and being an internet tough guy its quite pathetic.

Well I am not here to argue with you show, I am here to debate SG's defending the obamacare obamesshia solution to the illusory financial crisis which Ill touch on a little then get back to you.


As for Obama, Hawaii tried something similar to his Children's Health program. It lasted about 6 months. The humor in the program was that parents dropped their children from their employer's group health insurance program to save a few dollars and signed up the kids for the FREE government health insurance program. Guess what?? The program went broke in a matter of months

The financial crisis is what we see below:

Banking 2009 update
Bank failures: 92
Total Deposits: $7,566 billion
Failed Deposits: $85.0 billion
Failed Assets: $102.3 billion
Estimated Losses: $24.4 billion
Actual Losses est: $47.2 billion

Failed Deposits/Total Deposits: 1.11 percent
Estimated Losses/Failed Deposits: 28.7 percent
Actual Losses/Failed Assets: 46.6 percent
Total loans & leases: -4.6 percent

DIF balance Q2 reported: $10.4 billion
DIF balance FDIC est: -2.7 billion
DIF balance actual est: -11.8 billion

FD/TD 1930: 1.65 percent
FD/TD 1931: 0.34 percent
FD/TD 1932: 1.99 percent
FD/TD 1933: 8.55 percent
AL/FD 1930-1933: 28.88 percent

FD/TD 2008: 3.21 percent
AL/FD 2008: 14.99 percent


I can't argue with anyone that mis-interprets the laws, the constitution, the bill of rights etc. Southern Guardian asks for someone to give Dr. Ron Paul’s solution to the financial crisis. I think it is rather silly to ask such a thing of a man who is by definition a "constitutionalist" having written more books on the subject than all the books Bill Ayers could ever Ghost write for Barack insane Obama.

When I gave Ron Paul’s solution to the problem, is when I realized Southern Guardian didn't have the capacity to understand the solution as soon as he resisted the very first step of a Ron Paul fix for the economy arguing instead to be further duped by the false belief that the fed MUST be the answer or that we MUST do something RIGHT NOW infusing trillions of dollars into the biggest ponzi scam ever created. Don't let the media fool anyone, Bernie Madoff is a small time hoodlum compared to what Obama and his bank cronies have accomplished with fed. I think it goes without saying that if you don't get rid of the fed first, the efforts anyone makes WITH the fed is about as useless as putting out a wild fire using a bucket of gasoline. Obama has not only done that, but did it by the truck load.

The reason I can't give Southern Guardian an answer after he rejected the first part of a Ron Paul solution is summed up best in this summary for the book Titled "End The Fed" by Dr. Ron Paul.

Product Description:
In the post-meltdown world, it is irresponsible, ineffective, and ultimately useless to have a serious economic debate without considering and challenging the role of the Federal Reserve.

Most people think of the Fed as an indispensable institution without which the country's economy could not properly function. But in "END THE FED”, Ron Paul draws on American history, economics, and fascinating stories from his own long political life to argue that the Fed is both corrupt and unconstitutional. It is inflating currency today at nearly a Weimar or Zimbabwe level, a practice that threatens to put us into an inflationary depression where $100 bills are worthless. What most people don't realize is that the Fed -- created by the Morgan’s and Rockefellers at a private club off the coast of Georgia -- is actually working against their own personal interests. Congressman Paul's urgent appeal to all citizens and officials tells us where we went wrong and what we need to do fix America's economic policy for future generations.

www.amazon.com...

If Southern Guardian is not willing to read the many best selling books by this wise gentle man, while he continues to badger, berate, belittle his interlocutors by miss-representing the context of their arguments using bits and pieces of posts strung together in comments he has created his own comebacks for he thinks make him look really "cool n stuff" but they are not arguments with me or anyone else he responds to but of himself because No one can recognize the posts of ours he is responding to because they are of comments in contexts of things we have never said. Between the last two President's Bush and now Obama, I believe this country is now under control of something that has no name you can label it under.

It is an ideology which has stayed comfortably under the radar under the auspices of militant atheism, social Darwinists, many gay rights organizations, the ACLU, some call them the left but the left I remember was the left of dead center and the right I remember was right of dead center. Those opposing opinions of mine see us as the extreme right, fascist's big corporation, right wing religious, creationist 911truthers etc. We argue in areas of science, while REAL scientist's shake their heads and wonder. We argue in areas of engineering while real engineers shake their heads and wonder, we argue in areas of religion where God doesn't wonder, he just shakes his head.

In the meantime our children are growing up with fewer freedoms than I had and a lot less than my father had and even more than my fathers, father had but more than his father had.

The pendulum swings both ways they say and like the Big Wheel on the Price is right or wheel of fortune, the further away the sweet spot on the wheel, the harder you got to push. Did anyone expect any less of an extreme push to the left when bush was such a throw to the right? We here it is this guy, that guy your guy my guy but the guys are all same and while the game has changed to one of whiplash right wing turns to lofty long leaning lanes on the left at dizzying speeds vomiting from vertigo, we begin to acknowledge, America is sick.

She is sick of being called racist when she is so well known for her fight for civil rights while at the same time the many that died fighting for those rights were those that didn't have a reason to but died nevertheless for those that did and while republicans get called right winged racists, it was the party of Lincoln that set the most oppressed free from slavery. It was the religion of Christianity that brought us the science that now discriminates religion saying don't preach in our schools and we won't think inside your church's which is fine with most of us but the problem is,

they don't think outside the church anymore either.

She is sick from seeing her children being taken to the slaughter like cattle with about as much ambivalence and as much apathy as one has flushing a goldfish down the toilet.

Ironically we do this to her behind the slippery semantics of slick talking organizations that defy the name they are under like “Planned Parenthood” and we not only think it’s our choice to make but our right to have that choice and nine times out of ten, America chooses to comit suicide via infanticide one American infant at a time.

Oh yeah, I have seen all the excuses for it and the reasons why, but when you peel the onion most of them are just that, excuses and there is no reason behind the reason why.

She is sick of working tirelessly to raise her family while friends of the family have become allies of couples of terminally childless couples wanting the perks of a Government entitled and mandated acceptance of their lifestyles while they contribute nothing to it in children that later become tax payers and defenders of our Country in the military. She is sick of being called a bigot whenever she points this out, by those same individuals who believe they have the same rights as those in relationships whose sacrifice for raising Americas young, Americas future, those civil contracts were designed to promote.

She is sick of being fed fast food diets created by science which has included chemical additives which make her obese while and addicted to them while they scream for health care they can not afford we are dying from the very foods that are supposed to sustain us.


I see you have decided to honor me bigshow as someone chosen for your respected foes list and I wonder what it is I had done to deserve such praise,

After all, you and I are on the same team and although you say you have nothing to apologize for after threatening to hit me over the head with a book, called me a tough guy, and accused me of calling you names, I on the other hand, am not too big a show to apologize to you if I called you any names whether I remember doing that or not, if I did, I am sorry.

You and I have a different idea of the legal terms between expulsion and recall, but our desire to use them and remove every single solitary soul in the house and senate is the same. I think that can be done come Judgment Day. No I am not talking about when we all die, but election day, when, hopefully Americans finally get it, that if they ever want to know if their really IS an NWO or if they really want to know if term limits are a good thing, or if their really IS a two party system etc,. We need to vote ALL of them OUT, your guy, my guy, I have to vote the incumbent I like OUT as long as you vote your states incumbent OUT too. If we all did that, then change, REAL change isn't only possible, IT IS INEVITABLE! If we all did that, and the next day, the same old bastards are still there, THEN and only then, will we know, if their really is an NWO and that we have a problem but that day would also be, the beginning of their worst nightmare.

I never saw myself as an internet tough guy but I seem to give that impression I am told. Never quite figured that one out, as long as I am not to tough to admit I am wrong or apologize for things I have said and done, I think being tough is a title better left for the likes of Randy Paush, Patrick Swayze, and lets not forget those crazy cage fighters like the ice man liddel. Me, I'm just a retired military veteran with some experience in Government and research who has an interest in bodybuilding but it isn't to be tough or even to be healthy or in shape, lol, I work out for vanity's sake lol.

in spite of how things might appear I never once got "bent out of shape" and the only thing I see have been done that I could consider pathetic in this thread, is the tactics used by its op to put his countrymen down for defending the constitutional right they have to defend their unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, while SG defends the man who is actively taking them away from us.


[edit on 16-9-2009 by Stylez]

Have you ever even read this document?

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Perhaps you should do some reading.

reply to post by VAPatriot


Don't know who you are responding to VA, but I know I have, and have read many papers written about the intent of its authors. Such intent is the basis for correcting many of the miss-applied uses for denying rights of those with immunities protected by the 14th amendment are being argued against by those that think the 14th amendment is some expanding clause that allows anyone to do anything they please as long as they think it doesn't hurt anyone.

Many times I have seen the separation powers used as a basis for arguments attacking institutions those powers were written to protect.

You may find some clarity in this article by seneca on the quote you posted. I know it seems easy to just decide we must alter Government and I have seen some pretty radical ideas where they use many verses in that quote to justify its legality but until we understand the intent of the authors and the meaning of some of the words not by their general definition but their legal definition do we have any clue what they are saying.

www.lewrockwell.com...

reply to post by Stylez


My post was directed to the OP. Sorry, pretty new here.

I think you and I were cut from the same cloth.



[edit on 16-9-2009 by VAPatriot]

reply to post by VAPatriot


Your definition of "distruction" is Obama implementing the policies he ran on. No you do not have any right to impeach the constitutionally elected president based on your own ideological fear mongering and definition of "distruction".

Obama intends to implement the public option. He was constitutionally elected to do so. You may see it as distruction, then again the deafening silence for the last 8years tells me your views of "distruction" is really irrelevant to what the constitution means.

SG

[edit on 16-9-2009 by Southern Guardian]

reply to post by Stylez


From you Stylez:

"Obama only gave the politicians 15 minutes to read the bill"
Put the evidence where your mouth is.

"Ron Paul would have solved this financial crises better than Obama"
Wheres is 9 month solution to the financial crises?

"Obama blamed republicans for rushing bills"
Where did he say that?

Why do you continue to dodge backing up your claims? Were you lying?

SG

Elected yes - not given carte blanche to rewrite the constitution and the entire system of government, finance and business.

The sheer labeling as racists of anyone who disagrees with his practices is creating racists. Keep ridiculing people, keep taking their money, keep telling them what they can and can't do in their own home - and you will get people pretty um... angry. It's disgusting - and the government actually expects people to be happy and compliant about it?

Meanwhile, mainstream media keeps whining about how they are losing subscribers - maybe if they stopped ridiculing half of their audience, they wouldn't see such a decline. Hopefully they will continue with their current line - eventually even more of the liberals will start asking questions and get laughed at and ridiculed, too. Then we will all be united against...well, whatever it is that is left.

Originally posted by USXpat
Elected yes - not given carte blanche to rewrite the constitution

Where did he rewrite the constitution? Why are you fellas claiming all the sorts and not backing it up? Obama said this, Obamas re-writing that. Can you put the evidence and facts where your mouth is?

The sheer labeling as racists of anyone

If your not a racist you have nothing to worry about.

Meanwhile, mainstream media

The mainstream media was mainstream when they stopped pandering to Bushes wars and patriotic garbage and started pandering to ratings. Do you get it? The media will focus on anything that will get them ratings. The media is private so folks have by all means to say and report what they want. They are under no obligation, so really the constant whining about the mainstream media meanwhile complaining about how the government wants to control... I mean I have to ask myself.... whos trying to control what? Fox will say Democrats are wrong, MSNBC will report that republicans are hacks, and Rush limbaugh will play the magic negro. Distasteful, racist, politically bias, but nevertheless private media. They are not obligated to do anything specific.

maybe if they stopped ridiculing half of their audience

Is this a joke? Are saying MSNBCs reporting of rightwingers will bring down their ratings of.... rightwingers?

Seriously

Tell me... just out of curiosity... is Fox news considered mainstream media? I'v been meaning to ask you fellas this questions.

Wow, I cannot believe how many people posted on this, this, this, bull# thread.
SG, you are as narcissistic as your GOD. He has to be your God because he is doing the exact same things as Bush and I am sure you lambasted him, for 8 years. Elitism is a disorder people and you cannot argue with it. Welcome to the NWO. Where people like SG will make all the decisions for you. If you cannot see the where we are heading you are lost. I have only ignored one here, hope I do not have to add another. Absolute control is the only thing that is on the agenda from both parties and if you cannot see that. Nuff said.

reply to post by Stylez


That is the problem. How the documnet is understood.
I did not need someone to tell me what it means, seems self expanaitory to me. Just like the first amendment. It is in English you know.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Seems pretty clear to me...the government should not...
a) be a theocracy
b) promote one religion over another
c) make any laws governing religion and those that follow it

Pretty simple yet some people say that the amendment says separation of church and state...I don't see the word separation(an english word by the way).

Don't you think the founding fathers wrote out most precious documents so that everybody understands them, so that anyone can pick up a document read and understand it. I think so. And I don't think we are that much more stupid then our fathers before us.

We keep letting our masters change the rules(interpret the constitution as they see fit at the time) as time goes on. Read it and understand it. It is in English, you don't need an interpreter it was written for us all.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by Stylez

 

From you Stylez:

"Obama only gave the politicians 15 minutes to read the bill"
Put the evidence where your mouth is.

"Ron Paul would have solved this financial crises better than Obama"
Wheres is 9 month solution to the financial crises?

"Obama blamed republicans for rushing bills"
Where did he say that?

Why do you continue to dodge backing up your claims? Were you lying?

SG

No I'm not lying but YOU are, I've been told to ask you to copy paste the entire correct words from my post and not re-type your version of them and only things I have actually said. I only recognize one of those quotes SG, the rest I can't agree to.

SG. Oh and by the way I would consider making a habit of that

Originally posted by Balone
reply to post by Stylez

 

That is the problem. How the documnet is understood.
I did not need someone to tell me what it means, seems self expanaitory to me. Just like the first amendment. It is in English you know.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Seems pretty clear to me...the government should not...
a) be a theocracy
b) promote one religion over another
c) make any laws governing religion and those that follow it

Pretty simple yet some people say that the amendment says separation of church and state...I don't see the word separation(an english word by the way).

Don't you think the founding fathers wrote out most precious documents so that everybody understands them, so that anyone can pick up a document read and understand it. I think so. And I don't think we are that much more stupid then our fathers before us.

We keep letting our masters change the rules(interpret the constitution as they see fit at the time) as time goes on. Read it and understand it. It is in English, you don't need an interpreter it was written for us all.

Something I say to a lot of people that miss-interpret things that when you think about it, they couldn't possibly mean what someone else thinks they mean. Ill say, the (book or document) assumes the reader has common sense. I think you are right it is pretty simple on its face, but for instance, most people don't know the 14th amendment is only talking about due process and the first 8 amendments. Many people believe that the protection clause is about ensuring that every single living American is qualified for the exact same rights and priveleges as everyone else and that sex or gender age, height weight, race, etc doesn't have anything to do any of it. In other words what ever one has by virtue of tradition or culture, it is up to the Government to make sure all the rest get the same opportunity. Now expand that to encompass things like law suits where I sue someone that owns a bar called "hooters" and they are looking for a particular build to have as waitresses. Well such a lawsuit as ridiculous as it is took place.

Here is one where the ACLU is at it again and they are begining to lose more nd more of these cases and hopefully they will just quit trying to use that argument federalistblog.us...

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

The sheer labeling as racists of anyone

If your not a racist you have nothing to worry about.

You got to watch SG you guys, he does this all the time.

That isn't what he said SG and if you would kindly use his entire quote, you would see the REAL response would be NOT that he doesn't have anythng to worry about being called a racist if he isn't racist.

It is for being called a racist just for disagreeing with Obama. Whether or not he has something to worry about is another issue entirely.

If you are going to paraphrase someone's quote then the least you could do is link it to the original when it is so discontextual. Are you gettiing that cocky about getting away withg this crap all the time now that you don't even wait long enough to get some other posts in between them so they are not as easy to cross reference?

Australia has MEDICARE,a taxpayer funded
safety net for all disadvantaged people.it's been around
for 30 years.the biggest problem with it is overservicing
people who are not sick.its free so they go every other
day.and then there isthe doctors who bill medicare
claiming to have seen a patient every 15 minutes/24hrs
a day for the past few years!
but ,with the good,is the bad.
i think america needs a decent public health system
so get your act together.
p. s stop harassing barack obama so much.it must be so
negatively distracting.he's a nice guy ,with the most impossible
task.be a part of a solution.he represents all of you.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian
reply to post by VAPatriot

 

Your definition of "distruction" is Obama implementing the policies he ran on. No you do not have any right to impeach the constitutionally elected president based on your own ideological fear mongering and definition of "distruction".

Obama intends to implement the public option. He was constitutionally elected to do so. You may see it as distruction, then again the deafening silence for the last 8years tells me your views of "distruction" is really irrelevant to what the constitution means.

SG

[edit on 16-9-2009 by Southern Guardian]

Continue reading a few more lines.

-That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

If you continue reading further you will note the long list of the history repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over thes states. These refer to the present King of Great-Britain.

This has been happing well before Obama came into office. It most defiantly has continued since. The differance you see now is many more people are waking up to these facts.

Let's look at just as few of the enormous list of offences;

The Federal reserve, The Patriot Act, Garden Plot, Rex 84, eminent domain, the multitude of gross violations against the Second Amendment.

It is now up to the American people to decide whether they Consent to his Absolute Despotism. Let there be no doubt that this is the awful and fateful decision which the American people are now making. If they Consent to this blatant Absolute Despotism, there will be no turning back. The American Experiment in Liberty will have been declared by the Sovereign people to be a total failure and Republican Democracy in America will henceforth be declared null and void.

www.lewrockwell.com...

We did not fight when we had a reasonable chance to win without bloodshed. Now we will have to fight when we have little or no chance of winning without blood shed. God help us all.

I leave you with my signature to ponder.

Originally posted by JBA2848

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
reply to post by OldDragger

 

SO let me ask you, why in the hell should anyone CARE what you like or don't? Too freakin bad. The shallowness of thinking like this amazes me. It's not ABOUT YOU spoiled boy!
Obam won. Game over.

Winning a Presidential election in a representative republic is not a referendum or mandate to become or be a dictator.

The democratic process is one that is comprised of debate. Debate is comprised of dissent. People for and against issues arguing the pros and cons of said issues is what comprises and constitutes said debate.

Winning office, just means winning the right to be a representative and advocate of a party, not elevation to a position of authority above all others in a dictatorial manner meant to eliminate or stifle debate or dissent.

Perhaps if you spent more time studying U.S. History, the Constitution, and the American political process instead of playing X-box, and Nintendo you wouldn’t be inclined to think that the American electoral process is a contest and game to elect a dictator?

Maybe you should actually familiarize yourself with said game, and it’s actual rules before declaring it over?

I think you should have posted that 8 years ago when Bush was in office.

It appears that you have l;earned nothing of the accomplishments in this country during those eight years. Geez....... don't tell me you're one of those who think Bush really lost the first election. If so, it's no wonder you made the comment you did.

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Southern Guardian said: "Lets not the forget the constitution was not written "by conservatives" for "conservatives". It was not written "patriots" for "patriots". The constitution was written by the people for the people. The constitution represents all americans, in all ethnicities, religions and ideologies."

REPLY: Most all of the Founding fathers were of a conservative nature, and were indeed the "first" Patriots; and, while the Constitution does indeed represent what you wrote, most of the Founders were Christians who believed in God.

Southern Guardian said: "he was democratically elected as president on November 4th 2008. He was constitutionally confirmed eligible in December of 2008 by both congress and the electoral college. Whether you choose to accept it or not he did sufficiently provide evidence of his birth right for the presidency."

REPLY: No proof whatsoever has been produced to confirm his eligibility and in fact he and the DNC has spent almost $1.4 Million dollars to keep his birth records from public view. I won't go into what it appears that ACORN might have done to help with getting him elected.

Southern Guardian said: "Obama was constitutionally elected as president"

REPLY: This is not possible if he is found to be not eligible. He lied when he took the oath of office, so why wouldn't he lie about anything (everything) else?

Southern Guardian said: "In addition to this, the mere fact you all kept your mouths shut over the last 8years......."

REPLY: You mean where the reductions in tax rates generated enough NEW WEALTH greater than the entire GDP of China? Where the unemployment rate was better than 100% Where Consumer Confidence was at an all time high? Where his policies prevented two terrorist attacks A- The Sears Tower and B- the Golden Gate Bridge? Need I go on?



[edit on 17-9-2009 by zappafan1]

reply to post by Southern Guardian


The CIA kills Democratically Elected Officials all the time. I know you love your Border Collies, but do you really like being such a Sheep?

Do you have the fortitude to watch this?
You might discover that the "MEDIA" is a compactor full of crap, and the Right -Left Paradigm was a chasm opened to keep people like you talking about drivel and missing the POINT entirely.


video.google.com...#

reply to post by Southern Guardian


Wait a minute. Are you seriously saying that disagreeing with the President is unconstitutional; or at least immoral? No one is saying to REMOVE him. But we are saying he has a socialist agenda that is not RIGHT FOR AMERICA. You may not agree, but we have as much a right to voice our concerns as you do. Funny, I didn't see many of these posts when Bush was President and people were calling for his impeachment and even his death.

America is a pendulum. Right now we have swung left. But the swing is slowing and it will come back again, and then start all over.