King Obama....really?

[Harshaw]

I agree about the fact that how I identify myself taints how readers interpret my posts; I should really learn to explain my position better when I start a thread. I honestly give them more credit than that despite the fact that they refuse to see me they just see my political identifier. When will I learn? Maybe today.

In all honesty I feel like I see much more extremist behavior on the right then on the left. I really wish it was different because neither stance is perfect and needs to be kept in check by opposing opinions. A healthy right is needed by the left or we (the left) wind up doing the things we claim to oppose and loathe. Weshould balance either other; disagreeing but keeping our eye on solutions and compromise so that progress can be made.

You know, for someone who calls herself "opendebate," you're doing your level best to avoid it.

I've asked you a very simple question, which you should be able to answer. I've asked it several times, and I have not made any assumptions about you because of your "lean," etc., even when you started this very thread doing exactly that towards other people.

But at this point, you could have answered if you wanted to. There's really no other conclusion than that you just don't want to answer the question. I suspect it's because you're actually fine with what Obama is doing, despite its Constitutional wrongness. You have certainly refused to say otherwise.

 

[Beaudreaux]

I agree about the fact that how I identify myself taints how readers interpret my posts; I should really learn to explain my position better when I start a thread. I honestly give them more credit than that despite the fact that they refuse to see me they just see my political identifier. When will I learn? Maybe today.

In all honesty I feel like I see much more extremist behavior on the right then on the left. I really wish it was different because neither stance is perfect and needs to be kept in check by opposing opinions. A healthy right is needed by the left or we (the left) wind up doing the things we claim to oppose and loathe. Weshould balance either other; disagreeing but keeping our eye on solutions and compromise so that progress can be made.

The level or "extreme" of extremist behavior is judged by the closeness to a person's own ideological position. Setting a Hummer Dealership on fire as happened in California is an act of Extremist Environmentalist, but other "environmentalists" can empathize with the perpetrators even though they may not agree with the act itself. Bombing an abortion clinic is an act of Extremist Religious Anti-abortionists, but other 'religious anti-abortionists" can empathize with their views but not necessarily the act. Same with the government trying to enact laws on a Federal Level or abuse of power on the Federal Level from either party, where people that define themselves solely and singularly according to the party in power's platform can empathize with actions taken by the government that actually harm us as a whole, simply because they relate ideologically with the party in power.

We're all guilty of it. All of us. Recognizing it in ourselves is the first step toward true independent thought. We are all lead by to some level by others that espouse our own values. To what level we allow ourselves to be lead by, or blinded by those values as others define them, defines us.

Summary? I have no problem believing that you see more extremist acts on the right rather than the left. The same as others will see more extremists on the left rather than the right. Your or my opinion or observation is just that, our perspective. The facts may be, and usually are, different than our perspective.

 

[Beaudreaux]

It's a simple question she's decided to avoid answering.

I thought I read her answer? Maybe not to you. But it seemed that she did to me. And this doesn't mean that I agree with her perspective, just that she, in my opinion, addressed your concern.

 

[specklebang]

I can't remember one President who:

Wasn't called King from time to time by their opponents.
Wasn't accused of planning to bust the 2 term limit and become Dictator For Life
Didn't "tear up the Constitution"
Didn't go on vacation "too much"
...and be impeached because they wanted to "destroy America"

So, the King Obama routine is actually healthy and normal. Well, normal, maybe not healthy. Who knows?

I will say that I expected (foolishly) that Obama would roll back some of the newly acquired super-powers of DHS. Nope, not gonna happen. Never does. Nobody gives up power. So I'm disappointed but not terribly surprised. It will only get worse when we get our next "King":roll: and the one after that............

 

[Harshaw]

I thought I read her answer? Maybe not to you. But it seemed that she did to me. And this doesn't mean that I agree with her perspective, just that she, in my opinion, addressed your concern.

She never answered the question, not even close. She's ignoring it, while carrying on about being high-minded.

 

[CalGun]

So the defense of the obama regime is "bush did it." That makes it ok, all right, acceptable? If you think so then why have a problem wtih bush did it?

BTW you should give credit to o'loser for not filling those offshore prisons with enemy combatants...that loser takes no prisoners he just has them all droned to death.

I think some might need a little reminder of the the crap Bush and Cheney (AKA the Penguin) pulled when they were in office-

After the attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, the Bush/Cheney team saw an opening to free the presidency from checks and balances. They exploited the fear and insecurity that were pervasive at the time to claim emergency powers, creating offshore detention centers where prisoners were held without charge and eavesdropping on Americans without a warrant.

Mr. Bush’s signing statements not only amounted to a significant usurpation of power, but they came at a time when Congress was giving him everything he wanted. Congress passed the deeply flawed Patriot Act and authorized the invasion of Iraq. It even gave its retroactive approval to warrantless wiretapping. Mr. Bush also achieved many of his domestic policy goals, including tax breaks that mostly benefited the richest Americans.

The contrast with the Obama administration is stark.

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/23/executive-overreach/?_r=0

 

[Utility Man]

White privilege.

 

[Montecresto]

So the defense of the obama regime is "bush did it." That makes it ok, all right, acceptable? If you think so then why have a problem wtih bush did it?

BTW you should give credit to o'loser for not filling those offshore prisons with enemy combatants...that loser takes no prisoners he just has them all droned to death.

Excellent. When a president violates our constitution and is not held accountable, then the following president is emboldened. This is exactly what were experiencing. Wait till you see the next one.

 

[opendebate]

You know, for someone who calls herself "opendebate," you're doing your level best to avoid it.

I've asked you a very simple question, which you should be able to answer. I've asked it several times, and I have not made any assumptions about you because of your "lean," etc., even when you started this very thread doing exactly that towards other people.

But at this point, you could have answered if you wanted to. There's really no other conclusion than that you just don't want to answer the question. I suspect it's because you're actually fine with what Obama is doing, despite its Constitutional wrongness. You have certainly refused to say otherwise.

I did answer it, I just didn't direct my answer to you

 

[opendebate]

The level or "extreme" of extremist behavior is judged by the closeness to a person's own ideological position. Setting a Hummer Dealership on fire as happened in California is an act of Extremist Environmentalist, but other "environmentalists" can empathize with the perpetrators even though they may not agree with the act itself. Bombing an abortion clinic is an act of Extremist Religious Anti-abortionists, but other 'religious anti-abortionists" can empathize with their views but not necessarily the act. Same with the government trying to enact laws on a Federal Level or abuse of power on the Federal Level from either party, where people that define themselves solely and singularly according to the party in power's platform can empathize with actions taken by the government that actually harm us as a whole, simply because they relate ideologically with the party in power.

We're all guilty of it. All of us. Recognizing it in ourselves is the first step toward true independent thought. We are all lead by to some level by others that espouse our own values. To what level we allow ourselves to be lead by, or blinded by those values as others define them, defines us.

Summary? I have no problem believing that you see more extremist acts on the right rather than the left. The same as others will see more extremists on the left rather than the right. Your or my opinion or observation is just that, our perspective. The facts may be, and usually are, different than our perspective.

Well said, as usual, and I completely agree with you.

 

[opendebate]

So the defense of the obama regime is "bush did it." That makes it ok, all right, acceptable? If you think so then why have a problem wtih bush did it?

BTW you should give credit to o'loser for not filling those offshore prisons with enemy combatants...that loser takes no prisoners he just has them all droned to death.

You should read a little more of my posts before you go off an unfounded tangents.

 

[Harshaw]

I did answer it, I just didn't direct my answer to you

No, you didn't. I've read all of your posts.

If you did, point out the answer. The question is:

So do tell the nature of your problems with what Obama did. What was the problem with it, and why was it wrong? See if you can answer it without a tu quoque deflection.

I do not see an answer anywhere. So, either point it out or answer.

 

[beerftw]

The point is that, for many, I think their level of disgust is based on their feelings about the man more than his overreach while in office. I am not endorsing the act, and never said I did. Why do conservative "thinkers" have such a hard time picking up on nuance?

i think you completely have no rememberance of bushes era.

i remember the left in uproar over everything he did because he was republican yet voting for most of what he wanted.i remember the constitutionalists,socialists,true progressives not those who claim to be but support their party blindly,fiscal conservatives,moderate conservatives,and libertarians were all in heavy opposition towards bush's actions.

infact i remember that prior to bush enacting the patriot act,almost no one knew what the libertarian party was.bush's overreach brought the libertarian party from a mildly popular among independants party to a party everyone everywhere knows about.one of its biggest driving factors was the parties opposition to the wars and to the patriot act.

so there was infact heavy opposition to bush when he was president,from pretty much every group except those who blindly supported the republican party.bush won reelection despite being unpopular even among many conservatives simply because his opponent was terrible.

 

[spud_meister]

Pffft, black people can't be kings.

 

[Dezaad]

Neither of you seems to want to deal with the question -- Bush did it, so that makes it OK for Obama to do it? And if so, what made it wrong when Bush did it?

Putting together a little impromptu sniping party here is all well and good, but when do you plan to take a position?

Here is a liberal voice backing you, Harshaw. It is indeed NOT ok for Obama to do it.

Although I disliked Bush because I thought he was an idiot, I am actually angrier at Obama, because I feel betrayed.

 

[Dezaad]

The trappings of liberty are not optional to me. Theses are matters that should not be up for debate. I will not vote for any candidate in the future who does not clearly state their intention to set things back on an AMERICAN keel. If I have to, I will simply withhold my vote, and write in "none of the above".

If we are not going to have liberty at home, I really don't care about defending the home at all. The greatness of our nation is its liberty, and I see nothing of particular value to defend without it.

 

[opendebate]

Here is a liberal voice backing you, Harshaw. It is indeed NOT ok for Obama to do it.

Although I disliked Bush because I thought he was an idiot, I am actually angrier at Obama, because I feel betrayed.

Read my other posts. I am not endorsing it.

 

[Harshaw]

Read my other posts. I am not endorsing it.

You refuse to say you have a problem with it. I think you don't. You've had way too much opportunity to say you do, and you've dodged the question way too many times, to think otherwise.

 

[Harshaw]

Here is a liberal voice backing you, Harshaw. It is indeed NOT ok for Obama to do it.

Although I disliked Bush because I thought he was an idiot, I am actually angrier at Obama, because I feel betrayed.

You've always been very consistent that way, Deeze.

 

[opendebate]

You refuse to say you have a problem with it. I think you don't. You've had way too much opportunity to say you do, and you've dodged the question way too many times, to think otherwise.

Take a breath. I have said it several times in this thread.

 

[Harshaw]

Take a breath. I have said it several times in this thread.

Oh, now it's "several times." You can't point to where, but it's "several times."

Seriously, just point to where you did. This dodge, dodge, dodge, is only proving what I'm saying.

 

[opendebate]

I can't remember one President who:

Wasn't called King from time to time by their opponents.
Wasn't accused of planning to bust the 2 term limit and become Dictator For Life
Didn't "tear up the Constitution"
Didn't go on vacation "too much"
...and be impeached because they wanted to "destroy America"

So, the King Obama routine is actually healthy and normal. Well, normal, maybe not healthy. Who knows?

I will say that I expected (foolishly) that Obama would roll back some of the newly acquired super-powers of DHS. Nope, not gonna happen. Never does. Nobody gives up power. So I'm disappointed but not terribly surprised. It will only get worse when we get our next "King":roll: and the one after that............

Taking the higher road, as desirable as that is in a leader, can sometimes make you ineffectual. I think he started with good and genuine intentions but caved. If you recall it was the mission of the right to stop him from achieving anything.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Oh, now it's "several times." You can't point to where, but it's "several times."

Seriously, just point to where you did. This dodge, dodge, dodge, is only proving what I'm saying.

As they say down here in the south, I ain't got a dog in this hunt, but since I did jump in front of your gun already, here's one time for sure:

Like I said before. This is not about finger pointing. The point is to remind everyone that it happens on both sides; if you recall the article does not shy away from the fact that Obama is doing it also. The justification that follows I'm sure will make the right froth at the mouth while some on the left will agree with it. If the roles were reversed I am certain righties would find some justification for what Bush and Cheney did that made it OK for them but not Ok for us. But really, it is not okay for anyone regardless of their party.

...

But maybe since your user name starts with Harsh, you would prefer to just keep hammering at her.

And I'm out this time. Have fun, if this is the type of debate you prefer. I don't.

 

[opendebate]

Oh, now it's "several times." You can't point to where, but it's "several times."

Seriously, just point to where you did. This dodge, dodge, dodge, is only proving what I'm saying.

8 and 18 then indirectly 35

 

[Montecresto]

Here is a liberal voice backing you, Harshaw. It is indeed NOT ok for Obama to do it.

Although I disliked Bush because I thought he was an idiot, I am actually angrier at Obama, because I feel betrayed.

Thanks for saying that , it's really really important.