How can we get our military to forcibly remove Obama from office?, page 6

privacy

Pages: << 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 8 times

reply posted on 21-6-2010 @ 11:37 AM by OldDragger

reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 11:54 AM by maybereal11

Originally posted by I_am_Spartacus
The people who actually understand the Constitution and know its not a living document. Those who understand the original intentions of our Founding Fathers. NOT those who get their history lessons from Jon Stewart, their 6th grade history textbooks written by progressives like obama, or from the History channel. That means at least half the population who are as you would call "tea baggers", at least half the population that sees what he is doing and wants him stopped NOW!!!

Let me sort out your stance...

Constitution = Not a "living document"
Role back civil rights and abolition, women's right to vote etc.?

Are you an Originalist, Constructionist or Textualist?

Scalia?

Or are you just apeing something your heard Glen Beck say?

Let me try to understand your view better..

Those who don't understand the constitution..

Jon Stewart and his viewers.
Anyone who studied history in gradeschool with the aid of a textbook.
President Obama.
People "like him"
People who read books about history that were written by "people like him"
The History Channel

Is that it then? Those folks don't understand the constitution?

The ones that do undertsand the constitution..
"Those who understand the original intentions of our Founding Fathers" .... "teabaggers".

Though I suspect you are already aware of it, being the constitutional scholar you are, let me direct you to the quote that is often cited as the founding genius of the constitution...

The Committee of Detail was a committee established by the Philadelphia Convention on June 23, 1787 to put down a draft text reflecting the agreements made by the Convention ...

In the draught of a fundamental constitution, two things deserve attention:

1. To insert essential principles only; lest the operations of government should be clogged by rendering those provisions permanent and unalterable, which ought to be accommodated to times and events:

press-pubs.uchicago.edu...

Item 1 !!!

Geez...it was the first and most important thing they decided in Philadelphia when they started the process creating the Constitution of the United States.

Maybe read it again.

The founders intent is right there...essential principles only...which ought to be accomodated to times and events.

Now I am a huge fan of the constitution, and this will set your hair on fire...whatever his politics, by all accounts the POTUS is too.

For you to decide the TPM are the only Americans who understand the constitution...well I imagine such a claim would make every founding father, whatever thier politics, roll over in thier graves.

The document was designed to survive the ages and the politics...and to "belong" to everyone as opposed to a singular, often just idiotic, political party.

The document LIVES.

Every dictator and despot, from Pol-Pot to Castro has begun with this exact rhetoric ...and like the Tea Party Movement it is always cloaked in a "popular uprising" of intolerant folks being used, their sense of disenfranchisement goaded, their baser emotions affirmed..all in the pursuit of power...see Dick Armey.

It's not mysterious, just ugly.

There is nothing in this OP or most of the rhetoric that our founding fathers would not find inately offensive.

Just my 2 cents.

[edit on 22-6-2010 by maybereal11]

reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 04:13 PM by seagull

reply to post by maybereal11

Every dictator and despot, from Pol-Pot to Castro has begun with this exact rhetoric ...and like the Tea Bag Movement it is always cloaked in a "popular uprising" of intolerant folks being used, their sense of disenfranchisement goaded, their baser emotions affirmed..all in the pursuit of power...see Dick Armey.

The "tea party" movement isn't just conservatives. Though the right wing of the GOP would like you to believe that... While I freely admit to swinging to the right side of political issues, I'm well aware that others share in the "tea party" ideals. As they should...

The movement crosses, and recrosses, party and ideological boundaries. I'm involved myself with it, though not to any great extent other than supporting it, and taking part in some local gatherings... What the original intent was, and is, for the most part; is a call for govt. at all levels to be more responsive to our needs, not their need to be reelected.

FYI, a lot of people find the term "tea bagger" to be extremely offensive. I'd link it, but then I'd be in violation of Terms... Just sayin'.

reply posted on 22-6-2010 @ 05:53 PM by maybereal11

reply to post by seagull

With the exception of where I quoted the previous poster I edited to TPM, thanks for the heads up.

I have studied the evolution of the TPM...a movement founded on outrage of the Wall Street bailouts instituted by President Bush, that has evolved into a movement who surveys have shown think President Bush was the greatest thing since sliced bread. A movement that sat silently when the Financial Reform bill recently came to congress....

Yes most politicians worry more about re-election rather than serving the people, but however unseemly that is aren't those interests often one in the same? A politician that fails to listen will get voted out?

The TPM movement to me appears to be a caricature of a political party, with a deliberately ambigous and undefined platform driven by Dick Armey and the republican fringe which moderate GOP have come to fear and obey.

Thier platform appears to simply be orchestrated Anger....And the candidates they support represent the far right...if they support a few moderate democrats you can then make the claim that they are a pluralism of American political views.

reply posted on 23-6-2010 @ 10:35 AM by seagull

Originally posted by maybereal11
reply to post by seagull

With the exception of where I quoted the previous poster I edited to TPM, thanks for the heads up.

You're quite welcome...

I have studied the evolution of the TPM...a movement founded on outrage of the Wall Street bailouts instituted by President Bush, that has evolved into a movement who surveys have shown think President Bush was the greatest thing since sliced bread. A movement that sat silently when the Financial Reform bill recently came to congress....

In many cases, the TPM has become corrupted, and that's most unfortunate. Some, however, haven't. As I said above, I can't speak for all of them, but the one I'm peripherally involved with, hasn't been...yet. That's the unfortunate fate of most political movements, they become corrupted, either by their success, or by an outside influence hoping to capitalize on it.

Yes most politicians worry more about re-election rather than serving the people, but however unseemly that is aren't those interests often one in the same?

You'd like to think so, wouldn't you? A prime example from my neck of the woods here in Washington St. was George Nethercutt, who ran against Thomas Foley, who was at the time, Speaker of the House...his whole schtick was bringing power back to the people of Washington State, rather than Washington DC...he was in favor of term limits. Both of which helped him get elected... Gee...right up until he got to Washington...then we never saw him, and he helped file suit against Washington St. term limit initiatives which had won approval by a wide majority...something on the order of 90%, if I'm remembering correctly... Needless to say, he wasn't in office for very long... His interests became his own,while in search of personal power for himself...not his constituency.

A politician that fails to listen will get voted out?

Again, you'd like to think so... But all too often I hear folks lambasting the pols in office, at whatever level, yet those same names appear on the rolls year, after year...decade, after decade... Which is, of course, more our fault than the pols...

You've landed dead center in one of my pet peeves... You may have noticed?

The TPM movement to me appears to be a caricature of a political party, with a deliberately ambigous and undefined platform driven by Dick Armey and the republican fringe which moderate GOP have come to fear and obey.

On the national stage, you may be right. It sure looks that way. But I've got a hunch, and I sure as heck hope I'm right, that come Nov., there are going to be some shocked folks out there. On both sides.

Thier platform appears to simply be orchestrated Anger....And the candidates they support represent the far right...if they support a few moderate democrats you can then make the claim that they are a pluralism of American political views.

I think that's the Hannity/Limbaugh effect you're seeing there. He who yells the loudest, gets the press... But there are people, like myself, who are looking, listening, and getting angrier almost by the moment. I don't like what I'm seeing from either side, and am advocating a clean sweep of all of 'em come Nov. ...and I don't think I'm alone.

There's gonna be a coup, of sorts...but it's going to come from the ballot box, not the military. At least, that's what I'm seeing and hearing. Hope I'm right.

reply posted on 23-6-2010 @ 12:23 PM by maybereal11

Originally posted by seagull

On the national stage, you may be right. It sure looks that way. But I've got a hunch, and I sure as heck hope I'm right, that come Nov., there are going to be some shocked folks out there. On both sides.

......

I don't like what I'm seeing from either side, and am advocating a clean sweep of all of 'em come Nov. ...and I don't think I'm alone.

There's gonna be a coup, of sorts...but it's going to come from the ballot box, not the military. At least, that's what I'm seeing and hearing. Hope I'm right.