Thursday, September 27, 2012

My Open Letter to Obama on the Current State of Affairs

Mr. Obama,

I have noticed a very disturbing trend over the last decade or so, and in particular during your tenure in the White House.  The world seems to be in complete disarray.  Freedom and decency are waning while Islamofascism and other evils continue their ascendancy.  And all the while, most Americans seem to be oblivious to the ever-growing peril in our country and world.  I suspect this is simply because most Americans are too busy working and just trying to survive our day to day lives in this horrible economy of which you inherited and then exacerbated.  Of course it is not like you, our campaigner in chief, is helping to point out, let alone address any of these critical issues.  Indeed, it has now reached the point where you have fully disgraced the office of the presidency and are unworthy to sit in the oval office any longer.  Despite this, if the polls put forth by your allies in the sycophantic progressive mainstream media are to be believed, you are well positioned currently to be re-elected.  Again, the world is in disarray and logic no longer prevails.  Let me give you some specifics as to why I think this.

Mr. Obama, you have the gall to refer to the killing of our Ambassador and three other staffers in our Libyan embassy as a “bump in the road”.  No, Mr. President, it was an ACT OF WAR!  It was something that deserves addressing in a serious manner, even if it is hard to fit this into your schedule amongst your interviews with Pimp with a Limp, David Letterman, and your friends on The View.  Our country, our citizens, and our constitution are your ultimate responsibility to defend.  I distinctly recall you taking an oath in that regard, sir.  You have completely abrogated that responsibility, Mr. Obama, and in contrast to your wife’s sentiments, I am truly ashamed of my country for the first time in my life under your “leadership” accordingly.

You disingenuously told your fellow Americans that the riots and killings in Egypt and Libya were fomented by some ridiculous video that nobody has ever seen.  You then, on the day before yesterday at the U.N. General Assembly, admitted that it wasn’t the video that was the catalyst for this pre-planned attack of our sovereign soil on the anniversary of 9/11.  (Something which I am sure you already knew despite the fact that you have routinely missed nearly 40 percent of your daily intelligence briefings.)  Anyway, despite that, did you stand up for our constitutional right to free speech?  Nope.  Once again, you apologized to the world for the “a crude and disgusting video [that] sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.”  These terrorist scum attacked our embassies and killed our people, and YOU apologized.  I initially declined to make any comment on the issue until the facts were in and you were given a chance to react accordingly.  Since you seem to be content with the current status, I am now commenting accordingly.

As a supposed Constitutional Law expert, you should know that it is precisely such political and religious speech that our founders meant to protect when drafting the very first amendment in our Bill of Rights.  While the video was perhaps puerile and definitely offensive, it is NOT yours or anybody else’s right to curtail such speech.  Our freedom of speech is not meant to protect only the speech that is inoffensive to others.  Again, this is something you should know, sir. 

You had a chance to wax on the importance of our American exceptionalism as defined by our right of free speech at the U.N. the other day. You missed that opportunity for a teachable moment to the world and instead apologized.  As Newt Gingrich commented after your pusillanimous speech, your comments, “sent exactly the wrong signal. We’re not going to censor Americans on behalf of radical Islam and we need to say, calmly and comfortably, ‘If you’re going to be part of the modern world, that involves dissent.’ “

While we are on the subject, why do you find the need to defend Islam against anything that is deemed offensive by its practitioners?  I noticed that the vile and offensive Andres Serrano’s “Piss Christ” art work is going to be on exhibit again in New York this week.  Unlike your statement to the world that the offensive video was not created by the United States government, Serrano’s “art” of a crucifix in a jar of his urine WAS supported by tax payer dollars through the National Endowment for the Arts.  In other words, you DID build that, Mr. Obama! 

Why aren’t you apologizing to offended Christians for such a grave offense to our faith?  Is it because, while disgusted by it, we Christians understand that this asinine “artist” has a right to be offensive?  Is it because we aren’t rising up in the streets and storming the government offices for the National Endowment for the Arts and killing its director?  Once again, your inconsistency is showing.  Either defend our freedom of speech to the world, or apologize to us Christians too, Mr. Obama.

Your stewardship of the economy has been exceptionally poor.  Your infringement upon my freedom to exercise my religion via your still unconstitutional health care law is execrable.  Your weakening of our national security, disregarding our allies, and placating our enemies is dangerous and unforgiveable.  Your belief in the exceptionalism of every nation except the one which you were blessed to be elected president thereof is un-American.  The fact that you do not understand the wonderful differences and freedoms enshrined in our constitution for all Americans and instead see it as a list of “negative liberties” because it restricts government’s powers proves that you do not truly understand America. 

Consequently, you are not fit to be our president, no matter the results of the coming November election.  I am sorely disappointed in you, Mr. Obama, and will work tirelessly to explain to all within my very minimal sphere of influence why you should not be re-elected as our president.  You recently said that government cannot be changed from the inside, and perhaps that is true.  Regardless, we the people need to put you back outside of government where your dangerous ideologies can no longer harm this greatest of all nations that many Americans still love so dearly, myself absolutely included.

With great sadness, regret, and trepidation,

T. Paine.

17 comments:

S.W. Anderson said...

"Mr. Obama, you have the gall to refer to the killing of our Ambassador and three other staffers in our Libyan embassy as a bump in the road,'"

From The Hill:

"Obama made the comments during a larger discussion of whether recent events had given him any pause in his support for governments that had arisen following the Arab Spring.

"'I think it was absolutely the right thing for us to do to align ourselves with democracy, universal rights, a notion that people have to be able to participate in their own governance,' Obama said. ;But I was pretty certain and continue to be pretty certain that there are going to be bumps in the road because, you know, in a lot of these places, the one organizing principle has been Islam.'

"Romney was asked by NBC News whether he 'genuinely' believed that in those comments, Obama intended to express that he was not deeply saddened by the deaths of four American foreign service officers.

"'When the president was speaking about bumps in the road he was talking about the developments in the Middle East and that includes an assassination,' Romney replied.

"Earlier Monday, White House press secretary Jay Carney said Republican attacks on the president's phrasing were 'profoundly offensive' and amounted to a 'desperate attempt to grasp at words and phrases.'

"'The president was referring to the transformations in the region to this process that has only began less than two years ago, as we saw in Tunisia, and continues to this day with remarkable transformations occurring in countries around the region,' Carney said. 'And obviously in these countries there are huge challenges, huge obstacles to the kinds of change that the people in these countries are demanding, to the kinds of governments that are democratic in nature and responsive to the interests of average citizens in these countries.'"

Paine, you're not that gullible. You have to know what Romney was doing, and why. However much you disagree with Obama and his policies, surely in some corner of your mind you know he did not and would not refer to what happened to our people in Benghazi — or to any innocent people killed anywhere — as bumps in the road. I hope so, anyway.

T. Paine said...

Mr. Anderson, I appreciate the additional context, even though I was already aware of it, sir. That said, I would be less inclined to think that Obama was referring to the murder of our ambassador and other diplomatic staffers as “bumps in the road” if it weren’t for his actions (or lack thereof) to the contrary. To me it appears that through this lack of any actions or the laying down of any consequences that the “bumps in the road” could have been him referring to his poll numbers because of these murders. This “democratic” Arab Spring that Obama championed, led from behind, and ushered in Muslim Brotherhood supported governments is an anathema to freedom. One can hide that behind the moniker of democracy, and indeed these people should have the right to decide their own fate, but when we spend blood and treasure to help the Muslim Brotherhood and other groups which are hostile to America and its allies, such as Israel, that is a huge failure of Obama’s foreign policy for the civilized world.

Obama is either foolishly na├»ve or unintentionally complicit with these terrorists due to his asinine and dangerous foreign policy. Romney’s statement was correct. When Obama talked about bumps in the road, he was talking about developments in the Middle East, which included the assassination of our citizens during an attack on our sovereign soil.

I can understand people having a difference of opinion on policy as regards our economy etc., but when Americans are killed by terrorists on the anniversary of 9/11 and we continue onward with business as usual, something is very wrong. As I pointed out, this was an ACT OF WAR! Our response, where one has even been given, is milquetoast in our words and especially in our deeds. President Obama should at least have the decency to be ashamed, and I stand by every word I wrote, my friend.

S.W. Anderson said...

"I can understand people having a difference of opinion on policy as regards our economy etc., but when Americans are killed by terrorists on the anniversary of 9/11 and we continue onward with business as usual, something is very wrong."

What happened to the ambassador in Benghazi was a crime and a tragedy. It's also become clear it wasn't any kind of spontaneous protest by ordinary people. It was a planned, organized attack by terrorists armed with RPG's and assault rifles. The FBI and, I'll bet, our military are after those responsible.

Meanwhile, the president and secretary of state didn't go on with business as usual. Both spoke at a memorial service for those killed. I saw it on C-SPAN. It was a fitting, dignified and sincere tribute to those killed, and a reminder of the dangers even our non-military people often face in service to our country.

Obama hasn't spawned Muslim Brotherhood-led revolutions or governments. When you have upheavals in Mideast countries, you're going to have participation and sometimes end up with a new government with Muslim Brotherhood or similar groups involved or in charge. That figures, because throughout the Mideast those groups are as common as Rotary Clubs and Jaycees are in North America. Power vacuums tend to be filled by organized groups, not individual protesters from random crowds.

U.S. policy seeks to promote democracy and stability. It's not our prerogative or place to pick new leaders and governments in the aftermath of popular revolutions in other countries.

If you think otherwise, look at what happened after the CIA toppled a popular elected leader in Iran in the 1950's, and replaced him with a hated tyrant. How has that worked out for us? Not well, obviously.

Give Obama and Hillary Clinton credit for having learned from past mistakes, and for doing about as well as any two people could in a chaotic, confusing, potentially dangerous and still evolving situation on the far side of the world.

Anonymous said...

"U.S. policy seeks to promote democracy and stability. It's not our prerogative or place to pick new leaders and governments in the aftermath of popular revolutions in other countries."

So S.W., tell me where under Obama this policy has worked to the benefit of the United States as it should when considering the oath of office the President sears to uphold to protect against all enemy's both foreign and domestic?

Dave Dubya said...

I see no place where Obama said the killings were bumps in the road. I suppose if you hate someone enough you can claim their words mean whatever you decide they mean.

As in, "You didn't build your business".

It is sad the radical Right needs to be so dishonest as to lift so much out of context to fit their bias. But then again, that is the only way the elites can dupe the public into voting for the political party dedicate to serving only the interests of Big Money.

Dave Dubya said...

Such a tirade. I expect such from those who want to believe Obama is a Marxist who said, "You didn't build your business."

You take great leaps to preconceived conclusions. The media is corporate owned. Corporations are not liberal. They never once reported Bush was deceiving us with falsehoods leading to war. In fact, much of your "liberal" corporate media profitted from war coverage.

You call THAT liberal?

You admit Obama was left a mess on the verge of a depression, but the Markets are up and unemployment is down. This is what you term "exceptionally poor stewardship"? Gee, for that, do you believe Stalin would embrace him as a fellow commie?

What, no angry words for Bush? Everything is Obama's fault now?

Your hatred blinds you sir.

T. Paine said...

Dave, Obama does indeed exhibit Marxist tendencies through his OWN ACTIONS. One does not nationalize private corporations, fire the executives, put in place a government-picked CEO, tell the companies which cars they will make and not make, ignore the bondholders and then give ownership to the unions. That is someone Stalin would embrace gladly on ideology.

And for the record, Obama did indeed say “You didn’t build that!” in regards to people’s businesses. He thinks the government and society helped make that happen. That is Marxist. If you deny that those were Obama’s words or meaning, than you and only the most rabid progressives are the ONLY ones that think so. The rest of us got the message, just as Obama intended.

If half of the things that happened under Obama’s watch had occurred under Bush’s the media would not have stopped harping on it until impeachment proceedings were concluded. Bush had his AG fire several of his federal district attorneys (which was well within his legal rights) and the media screamed for an investigation and the firing of AG Gonzalez. Clinton fired ALL of his federal DA’s upon taking office and it wasn’t even noticed. Eric Holder is found in contempt of congress for his cover-up and perjury regarding Fast and Furious, and the mainstream liberal media buries the story or doesn’t even cover it. (Especially in an election year in which Obama “knew nothing” about Fast and Furious and yet still claimed executive privilege.)

The media concocted and flamed the fires over a non-story about Valerie Plame in an attempt to get Rove, Cheney, or Bush for national security leaks but Obama can release details of the bin Laden shooting and jeopardize secret assets, Seal team members, and a Pakistani doctor who was put in jail for helping us, all because Obama wanted the media attention. And what does the liberal media do, of course? It complies with their fellow ideological leftist in chief making him out to be the hero rather than ask why he was releasing sensitive information that jeopardizes national security.

The fact is that the president has stood by while 23 million people have lost their jobs, our AAA credit rating has been downgraded, our enemies have grown in strength almost with our seeming support, and yet the press still is supportive of Obama to the point where it is even a close race in the polls tells anyone with common sense that the media is horribly lazy and definitely left-leaning biased.

Obama promised that our healthcare costs would drop $2500 after Obamacare was implemented. Instead it has gone up by that amount. He promised he would cut the national debt in half. Instead he has damn near doubled that. He said if he didn’t do these things by the end of his first term, he would be a “one term proposition”. The unemployment rate has only gone down below 8% for the first time since early in his term ONLY because millions of people are no longer looking for work. He has no regard for constitutional governance or our Bill of Rights as he is intentionally violating my first amendment right to practice my religion. He is a liar of the worst degree, a Marxist, and he does not have America’s best interest at heart. He is a despicable man.

He cannot even take responsibility for the killing of our ambassador and three others. Instead he throws Hillary under the bus. After all, according to Obama, “the buck stops with you.” Truman must be turning in his grave.

I criticized Bush whenever he strayed from constitutional governance. The difference is that Obama rarely strays into governing constitutionally.

The fact that you are still defending Obama tells me that you are the one that is blinded, sir. The only ones left supporting Obama are the rabid leftist partisans and the ignorant, sir.

Dave Dubya said...

I presume to be the rabid leftist rather than the ignorant...

As usual, it takes longer to debunk mis-information than to state it.

But here goes:

“One does not nationalize private corporations”

(What corporation is nationalized? Bush and Republicans bailed out companies too. Bailed out is not “nationalized”, except when done by Obama, of course, and only in the double standards and propaganda of the far Right.)

“That is someone Stalin would embrace gladly on ideology.”

(You would mean Bush for his bailouts, too then, right? Stalin would embrace Bush as a commie?? Authoritarian, yes, but commie?)

“Obama did indeed say “You didn’t build that!” in regards to people’s businesses. The rest of us got the message, just as Obama intended.”

(No he didn’t. Your indoctrination is well regurgitated. Show us one moderate who agrees with that gibberish. Take your time, you’ll need it. The real message is the radical Right will dishonestly take anything out of context to promote their propaganda. And the deluded followers will repeat it again and again, as if repetition makes it true. This is a Goebbels tactic, and it often works, sadly. Note how Romney got caught in his lie about Obama not calling it terrorism in Libya. Repeating Right Wing talking points does not make them true. Mitt found that out last night when called out on his lie.)

“If half of the things that happened under Obama’s watch had occurred under Bush’s”

( Wow. Show us how 9-11 and the invasion of Iraq, and the financial crisis and collapse of the economy compare to “half the things” under Obama, including the body count. Get real, and look up hyperbole while you’re at it.)

“Bush had his AG fire several of his federal district”

(Failing to prosecute trumped up voter fraud charges was the reason Bush fired at least one US Attorney. The Justice Department was highly politicized under Bush. Just ask family mouthpiece Al “I can’t recall” Gonzales. I condemn the botched failure of “Fast and Furious” and support the release of any information that would help prevent this from happening again.)

“The media concocted and flamed the fires over a non-story about Valerie Plame”

(Media concocted? If you mean the outing of a CIA operative by conservative columnist, and Cheney shill, Robert Novak. She was called “Fair game” for retaliation against her husband.)

“Obama can release details of the bin Laden shooting”

(He can, but did he? Where?)

“The fact is that the president has stood by while 23 million people have lost their jobs, our AAA credit rating has been downgraded, our enemies have grown in strength”

(“Stood by” is not accurate. He was completely obstructed by the Right. Obama’s jobs bill? Obstructed. Debt ceiling? Obstructed and held hostage by the Right. Have you forgotten how that all went down? Al-Qaeda was at its peak and did most of their killing during the Bush years. And bin-Laden is now, and forever, dead. You’re welcome.)

Continues...

Dave Dubya said...

More debunking and an agreement...

“the media is horribly lazy”

(On this we agree. The corporate news media has been conglomerated and corporatized as profit seeking operations, rather than a public service information source. Investigative journalism is fading as FOX(R) partisanship grows in influence.

This question for you remains unanswered: The media is corporate owned. Corporations are not liberal. They never once reported Bush was deceiving us with falsehoods leading to war. In fact, much of your "liberal" corporate media profited from war coverage. You call THAT liberal?

Well, do you call that liberal? Or corporate? It cannot be both.)

“He cannot even take responsibility for the killing of our ambassador and three others”

(Ah, yeah, except he did.)

Obama Takes Responsibility for Libya

“Obama promised that our healthcare costs would drop $2500”

(Let me refresh your memory. This was his campaign promise in 2008 if we implemented his original national health insurance exchange. As we know insurance companies and Republicans were “at the table” and prevented that from happening.)

“The unemployment rate has only gone down below 8% for the first time since early in his term ONLY because millions of people are no longer looking for work”

(... is magically only true for Obama. Never before, eh? Millions more are now retired, you know,...or did you? We know how you guys see it. If unemployment goes up, it’s all Obama’s fault. If it goes down, Obama has nothing to do with it. Am I right? Well regurgitated, though. You’re scoring many points as an authoritarian follower.)

“he is intentionally violating my first amendment right to practice my religion. He is a liar of the worst degree, a Marxist, and he does not have America’s best interest at heart. He is a despicable man.”

(This is the crux of your extremism. Your right to practice your religion is unchanged and not violated in any way. Obama may tell a lie now and then, but they all pale in comparison to the pre-war Bush lies that killed thousands of Americans and uncounted thousands of Iraqis.)

“A Marxist”

(And there it is. Behold, one of the three most radical and distorted views possible of Obama. Are you sure he’s not a Kenyan Muslim Marxist? Why not go all the way and join that club of wild-eyed fanatics?)

“He is a despicable man”

(And there’s the justification for the intense hate, clouded by the most radical of Right wing propaganda.)

“The fact that you are still defending Obama”

What you perceive as my “defending Obama” is actually criticizing your propaganda. I can criticize Obama too, especially for extra-judicial killings, the Patriot Act, the FEMA Amendment, submission to Wall Street, and other corporatist Bush policies he’s continued. I also criticize him for appeasing, rather than opposing, the Republican radical Right.

John Myste said...

As a supposed Constitutional Law expert, you should know that it is precisely such political and religious speech that our founders meant to protect when drafting the very first amendment in our Bill of Rights

Actually, he is the expert, not you. The Founders, Bless, did not intend to protect free speech internationally. If you have evidence to the contrary, please share.

These terrorist scum attacked our embassies and killed our people, and YOU apologized.

He did not apologize to the terrorists. He apologized for a crude video, which was appropriate. I apologized to my wife for something on that same day, so I guess I am guilty also.

I initially declined to make any comment on the issue until the facts were in

If only Romney had such integrity. Instead, he incited his idiot base with this and made the whole thing a political concern.

You had a chance to wax on the importance of our American exceptionalism as defined by our right of free speech at the U.N. the other day. You missed that opportunity for a teachable moment to the world and instead apologized.

You had a chance to donate your time to a soup kitchen today, but instead chose to falsely accuse your president of a lack of patriotism because he does not think like you. What is your problem with soup kitchens?!!!!

While we are on the subject, why do you find the need to defend Islam against anything that is deemed offensive by its practitioners?

He just wants to be respectful of all religion, as the Founders, Blessed be He, intended.

I noticed that the vile and offensive Andres Serrano’s “Piss Christ” art work is going to be on exhibit again in New York this week.

Wow! I missed it the first time (many years ago). Join me, my friend, in viewing the art.

Serrano’s “art” of a crucifix in a jar of his urine WAS supported by tax payer dollars through the National Endowment for the Arts

Cite source, please.

Either defend our freedom of speech to the world, or apologize to us Christians too, Mr. Obama.

In America we have freedom of speech, per the Founding Gods we worship. Did you not just open with this as you congratulated Obama on his Constitutional Authority? If you are going to complain about consistency, you should try to be consistent, sir. Do you support free speech or reject it? You seem to resent when Obama does not defend free speech internationally, and at once you criticize him for not condemning it locally. I don’t get that.

John Myste said...

Your stewardship of the economy has been exceptionally poor.

He continued Bush’s approach. All liberals are mad about that.

Your infringement upon my freedom to exercise my religion via your still unconstitutional health care law is execrable.

Not to mention fictitious. I am especially angry about Obama cutting funding to preserve the endangered Unicorn.

Your weakening of our national security, disregarding our allies, and placating our enemies is dangerous and unforgiveable.

And by this, you mean funding the effort that caught Bin Ladin, right? To be fair, that same funding was done under the failed GOP effort during the Bush years. We can still give them an E, though.

Your belief in the exceptionalism of every nation except the one which you were blessed to be elected president thereof is un-American.

As is your identical belief.

The fact that you do not understand the wonderful differences and freedoms enshrined in our constitution for all Americans and instead see it as a list of “negative liberties” because it restricts government’s powers proves that you do not truly understand America.

He understands your conservative view of America. Like all rational people, he finds it sick.

Consequently, you are not fit to be our president, no matter the results of the coming November election.

You have not made your case. You basically said that because Obama does not share your conservative philosophy, he is not fit for duty. It only shows that he is not fit for duty as a conservative, which, under scrutiny, turns out to be high praise.

You did not sign your real name! Obama does courageously sign his letters, bearing his philosophy.

I do understand. If I sent that letter to Obama, I would not want him to know who wrote it either: how embarrassing.

With much respect, as always,

[Anonymous]



T. Paine said...

Dave, my time is very limited, but I will address a few of your more interesting points.

First, I acknowledge that Bush and past Republicans have also bailed out companies. They should not have. It is not the government’s place to do so. Bankruptcy law is in place to allow corporations to reorganize and shed debt so that they can hopefully emerge stronger. Obama bypassed that and basically dictated what cars GM would make. No more Pontiac, Oldsmobile, Hummer, Saturn. He shut down many dealers, even successful ones. (Albeit many of those were ironically owned by non-supporters. I am sure that is just a coincidence though, right?) Obama then ignored the debts owed to the bondholders and gave control of much of the assets to the unions, in violation of contracts and the law. No Republican has done anything even remotely similar. Nice try with the “they did it too” defense though.

“You didn’t build that!” is exactly as I said it was. You are too drunk on Kool Aid to acknowledge the truth of the matter. Any objective watching of Obama’s video on that speech will come up with the same exact conclusion. The fact that Obama had to come out and “clarify” repeatedly after the fact means that most reasonable people interpreted his words at face value, just like I did.

By the way, much of the financial crisis was precipitated by Barney Frank and Chris Dodd with their criminal stewardship of Freddie and Fanny and their subsequent collapse of the housing market. McCain warned of the impending collapse of those institutions, and Democrats called him a racist for not wanting people of color to have the opportunity to buy homes, even if they were not financially able to do so.

As for the Plame incident, the special counsel appointed, Patrick Fitzgerald, knew at the outset that it was Richard Armitage in the State Department that let out the information about Plame’s identity in the CIA. Despite this knowledge, he continued his investigation in the hope of toppling a few high level members of the Bush administration. I guess Scooter Libby is the worse for the wear accordingly, huh?

The contrast with Obama releasing information that was damaging to national security is stark. See http://www.savingcommonsense.blogspot.com/2012/06/political-gain-trumps-national-security.html for a detailed analysis of it.

Next, Dave, you seem to have a selective memory. I seem to recall an onslaught of negative press regarding the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars during Bush’s tenure. Hell, even the fact that the news used to do a weekly body count of Americans killed during the Bush administration but seemed to have stopped under Obama, despite the fact that a vast amount more people have been killed under his watch than Bush, would strongly suggest a leftist agenda.

Obama said that Libya was caused by a video and not terrorism. He knew it was a coordinated attack and yet lied to the American people. This issue will come back to haunt him on Monday’s debate, if Romney has any sense whatsoever.

As for health care costs doubling instead of halving merely being “a campaign promise thwarted by the GOP”, let me remind you that Obamacare was passed on a strictly party line vote, and even then many of the Democrats had to be bribed with taxpayer funded projects in exchange for their votes. Nice try to shift blame once again, though, sir.

I now fully admit that I loathe Obama and what he has done to our country. If that is extremism, then to quote Goldwater, extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.

And my first amendment right to practice my faith has indeed been violated by this man. I refer you to this posting for specifics: http://www.savingcommonsense.blogspot.com/2012/02/forthcoming-elimination-of-americans.html

And Obama does indeed exhibit Marxist tendencies. Words mean things. That said “Marxist” seems apropos for Obama. After all, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…

T. Paine said...

Responses to Mr. Myste follow:

Paine: For a supposed constitutional law expert, how come Obama seems to repeatedly disregard the constitution? I guess he should be more of a novice like myself and then perhaps he would attempt to honor his oath to support and defend the Constitution.



Mr. Myste: He did not apologize to the terrorists. He apologized for a crude video, which was appropriate.

Paine: He apologized to the “upset protestors” for the video, despite the fact that he KNEW that the video was not the catalyst for the well-orchestrated terrorist attack on our embassy. He lied and the more information that comes to light on the topic, the worse our cowardly president appears in his shifting blame to the intelligence community and then ultimately to Hillary at State.




Mr. Myste: Cite source, please. (Regarding Serrano’s “Piss Christ” being supported by taxpayer dollars via the National Endowment for the Arts)

Paine: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/art_controversy_back_in_ny_ZjuqKoVhysXZ3eQg6U6n1H



Paine: Either defend our freedom of speech to the world, or apologize to us Christians too, Mr. Obama.

Myste: In America we have freedom of speech, per the Founding Gods we worship. Did you not just open with this as you congratulated Obama on his Constitutional Authority? If you are going to complain about consistency, you should try to be consistent, sir. Do you support free speech or reject it? You seem to resent when Obama does not defend free speech internationally, and at once you criticize him for not condemning it locally. I don’t get that.

Paine: Obama should have explained our right to free speech on the international stage, despite sometimes offensive speech like that video. The protestors supposedly wanted the maker of the video arrested, or worse. Obama missed that teachable moment and instead apologized. I don’t mind him apologizing for the offensive film, but he should have explained that such was the person’s right to make it as an American. Such is that man’s constitutional right. The fact that Obama feels compelled to apologize only for our Bill of Rights internationally, while violating them domestically prompted me to request that he also apologize to us Christians whose rights he has violated. It was not I that was inconsistent, dear sir.

T. Paine said...

Paine: Your stewardship of the economy has been exceptionally poor.

Myste: He continued Bush’s approach. All liberals are mad about that.

Paine: We find ourselves in agreement here, my friend. Albeit, Obama’s approach was Bush-on-steroids with the spending.



Paine: Your intentional obtuseness regarding Obama’s violation of my right to practice my faith is noted. Evidently the Catholic Church is suing the government over this constitutional abuse for fictional unicorn-like reasons, I suppose.



Paine: The fact that you do not understand the wonderful differences and freedoms enshrined in our constitution for all Americans and instead see it as a list of “negative liberties” because it restricts government’s powers proves that you do not truly understand America.

Myste: He understands your conservative view of America. Like all rational people, he finds it sick.

Paine: Constitutionalism and liberty are sick? That is an interesting take, John!



Myste: You have not made your case. You basically said that because Obama does not share your conservative philosophy, he is not fit for duty. It only shows that he is not fit for duty as a conservative, which, under scrutiny, turns out to be high praise.

Paine: I do not think Obama is not fit for duty because he is a progressive. He is not fit for duty because he has intentionally ignored the constitution at nearly every turn.


Myste: You did not sign your real name! Obama does courageously sign his letters, bearing his philosophy.

Paine: The copy of this letter I sent to the White House did contain my real name. If he is re-elected, I wouldn’t be surprised to be audited by the IRS next year accordingly.

Dave Dubya said...

Thanks for your time. However you took liberties of simple assertion again.

Have you considered what your “quaking” sounds like? ;-)

I'm clear now that Republican balouts are not Marxist, and Democratic bailouts are clearly Stalin's dream.

“Obama “dictated”...

According to your quacking, but no evidence is offered.

More Americans are seeing the wisdom of saving American jobs.

“You didn’t build that!” is exactly as I said it was.

Yes, so YOU say. But who else? You failed to indicate one moderate voice in agreement.

News for you. Frank and Dodd never ran Wall Street. Remember them? No blame for them in your hatred?

And to refresh your memory again, Patrick Fitzgerald, a Republican, knew Libbey was the perjuring patsy. He said there was a “cloud over the vice-president” in the Plame leak. Remember that now? Leaks happen. You failed to link them to Obama. Remember when Plame was outed? Bush said, “We’ll take care of the leaker”. Boy did he. He gave him a get out of jail free card.

Do you actually think what finally passed as Obamacare was anything like a liberal program, or even similar to his original intent? Really? We know how Obamacare was passed, to appease corpo-dems, after many changes were made to seek Republican cooperation. We know now they hate Obama more than they love America. You too?

Yes, I read your post on “contraception-gate”.

Your puffed up sense of self-righteousness may have been offended, but YOUR freedom of religion was not violated. There’s a difference.

Romney lied about Obama. Period. End of discussion, except for the lunatics who say Obama “cheated” in calling out Romney’s blatant LIE.

It’s interesting how you forgive a white liar and loathe a black man for less dishonesty.

Not calling you a racist, but you are very selective, and relative, in your forgiveness and moral pronouncements.

I now fully admit that I loathe Obama and what he has done to our country.

What? Worse than ignoring “Bin-Laden determined to strike in US”, and worse than spewing lies to take us into a war with a country that didn’t attack us, that killed over three thousand Americans?

Your version of Obama must be Satan himself. That would fit your character.

I seem to recall an onslaught of negative press regarding the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars during Bush’s tenure

Oh, really now? Show us. And I’ll show you how the corporate media censored Phil Donahue’s most highly rated of MSNBC’s shows for disagreeing with Bush’s war-mongering.

Where would you be without me to refresh your selective memory?

You’re welcome.

John Myste said...

Paine: Constitutionalism and liberty are sick

Another Paine quote logged. However, I want to point out that neither I, nor Obama, support this notion.

T. Paine said...

Dubya: I'm clear now that Republican balouts are not Marxist, and Democratic bailouts are clearly Stalin's dream.

Paine: Nope, Bush or any other RINO doing a bailout is not justified and is nothing more than the government choosing winners and losers. It is Marxist regardless of whether the person doing it has a “R” or “D” behind their name.


Paine: “You didn’t build that!” is exactly as I said it was.

Dubya: Yes, so YOU say. But who else? You failed to indicate one moderate voice in agreement.

Paine: Dave, even that bastion of conservatism known as the Washington Post understood it as most of us normal Americans did. “Obama has not repeated the words that sparked the controversy, and he has toned down the broader argument — that government help is essential to business success — in the six weeks since he ad-libbed the line near the end of a long campaign swing.” http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-facing-mounting-questions-over-you-didnt-build-that-remark/2012/09/02/c409f90c-f52b-11e1-86a5-1f5431d87dfd_story.html



Dubya: News for you. Frank and Dodd never ran Wall Street. Remember them? No blame for them in your hatred?

Paine: No, Frank and Dodd were a pair of corrupt politicians that destroyed our housing market through their incompetent and corrupt stewardship. They both belong in jail for their “perks” received via Fannie and Freddie while those organizations collapsed. They were the catalysts for the economic downturn.


Dubya: Do you actually think what finally passed as Obamacare was anything like a liberal program, or even similar to his original intent? Really? We know how Obamacare was passed, to appease corpo-dems, after many changes were made to seek Republican cooperation. We know now they hate Obama more than they love America. You too?

Paine: And yet, despite those compromises to try and attract jaded GOP votes, not one came over to the dark side where a partisan line vote paid for with bribes of tax payer dollars became law that was passed so that we could see what was in the bill then. And yes, I do hate Obama because of the fact that everything he has done thus far has been to diminish America and its liberties. I despise Obama because I love America. If he wants to run a banana republic, he should leave America and run for office elsewhere, accordingly.


Dubya: Yes, I read your post on “contraception-gate”. Your puffed up sense of self-righteousness may have been offended, but YOUR freedom of religion was not violated. There’s a difference.

Paine: Oh please, do tell me what you see as the difference, sir, if you can. And while you’re at it, make it a really good argument because the Catholic Church evidently is also suing the government for the same said violations of freedom of religion for which you do not acknowledge. Perhaps we are just stupid, because we don’t understand that still having to pay for something that is contrary to one of the core tenets of our faith is not somehow violating our first amendment right.


Dubya: Romney lied about Obama. Period. End of discussion, except for the lunatics who say Obama “cheated” in calling out Romney’s blatant LIE. It’s interesting how you forgive a white liar and loathe a black man for less dishonesty.

Paine: I am not sure to what you are referring with this lie. Has Romney been less than honest at times regarding Obama? Yes, but “you didn’t build that” was not one of those times. Obama claiming that Romney via Bain Capital killed Stupak’s wife certainly is a lie! I won’t even bother acknowledging further your liberal attempts at playing the race card. I think you are guilty of that very same “selective memory” of which you accuse me, my friend.