world

U.S. congressman warns of Obama dictatorship

170 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

170 Comments
Login to comment

A thinly veiled plea for Obama's assasination. I'm surprised it took a whole week.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think before everyone goes off the deep end, this congressman should have known what type of response this was going to bring. ON the flip, Obama should have WELL known what type of response his idea was going to bring. Not too long ago, everyone here was up in arms about the creation of the department of homeland security - very few of us liked it.

We have enough problems with local police departments. I even will go as far as agree with Everton on that part.

Why is it that people in government keep thinking the best solutions are the creation of even more offices. Now this one make very little sense in the current environment.

This is almost as bad as those towns passing baggy pants ordenances.

The congressman should have kept this thought in his own circle. Anything a repub says, whether good or bad, is going to be taking as wrong.

Obama is wrong on this and so is the congressman's approach to it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If I don't wear a Obama cap and gown will I be arrested by the national security force?

What about cellphones and calculators?

Will the FCC shut down talk radio?

Must I pray facing Washington DC and bow down to our President-Elect?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How do you spell "bitter"?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What is the FBI if not a civilian force which shares the burden for national security? I think Broun is getting a little ahead of himself here.

I'm not really sure what Obama has in mind, but if I were going to compare anyone to Hitler, I'd probably go with the guy who created something called the "Homeland" Security Department. Without knowing exactly what Obama is talking about, it's hard to say that he's wrong on this. However, it's difficult for me to see the need for any additional security apparatus that the government does not already have.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is a beat-up. The honorable gentlemen from the Great State of Georgia needs to stop smoking the wacky tabacci and realise the importance of the position he holds. The trouble with expousing cr*p like this is that some more impressionable members of society might believe it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama's plan for a "civilian national security force" made me uneasy the day he announced it. But I'm not surprised by it either. It sounds reminiscent of the proletarian guard established by Stalin in the 1920's:

"...the proletariat must without fail possess a military force, it must without fail have its "proletarian guard," with the aid of which it will repel the counter-revolutionary attacks of the dying bourgeoisie"

Joseph Stalin

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama's plan for a "civilian national security force" made me uneasy the day he announced it. But I'm not surprised by it either. It sounds reminiscent of the proletarian guard established by Stalin in the 1920's

With all due respect; this conspiracy theory about Obama being 'socialist' or Stalinist or even facist makes its proponents look like laughable, bitter and sulky high school students whose friend lost the class president election.

Fact is, we don't know what Obama intends. We can safely say though, it will not be 'proletarian guard', and its mandate would not exceed constitutional limits.

Obama needs to be treated like any other president - credit where credit is due and criticism when it is needed. Sensationalist name calling and hand wringing is neither - it is just rumor spreading and name calling reminiscent of the school yard and cafeteria full of Princesses, Jocks, Rednecks and Hippies.

KN

0 ( +0 / -0 )

We can safely say though, it will not be 'proletarian guard', and its mandate would not exceed constitutional limits.

And we can safely say that because ...?

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” Obama said in July. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

This is scary stuff! I'm glad I don't live there.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

makes its proponents look like laughable, bitter and sulky high school students

You mean kinda like the democrats have looked for the past eight years?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And we can safely say that because ...? “We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set,” Obama said in July. “We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.”

He could be referring to reorganising and strengthening the FBI, ATF, etc. We don't know and that's the point. Until more information comes to light, specualting only fuels paranoia.

Obama is right about this though - Terrorism is a security issue, not a military one. A clear set of boundries, laws and limits with proper funding to the appropriate agencies are required for national security - not carte-blanche powers that promote sloppy investigative work and 'arrest statistics'.

"This is scary stuff! I'm glad I don't live there."

I can think of many other places with much more intrusive state security agencies than the US. Despite its problems and challenges, the US is still far ahead of most places in ther world in which I personally would live.

KN

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Despite its problems and challenges, the US is still far ahead of most places in ther world in which I personally would live.

For now, that might still be true. Let's wait a couple of years and see...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded,” sayeth the messiah.

Reminiscent of Hitler's SS, isn't it?

Too bad no one was paying attention to obama's intentions before the election.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

For now, that might still be true. Let's wait a couple of years and see...

Agreed, we don't know what will happen. But I for one, am optimistic because I'd rather be optimistic and wrong than pessimistic and right.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

President-elect Barack Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship.

Fascism stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. Exactly where obama and the democrat-led congress is taking America.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Reminiscent of Hitler's SS, isn't it?

No.

Hitler's SS was an instrument of state terror. Obama's plan doesn't sound anything at all like that. Hitler's force was real and fundamentally accountable to him. Nothing in Obama's plan has been shown to circumvent Congressional oversight. In fact, there is no plan.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Fascism stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. Exactly where obama and the democrat-led congress is taking America

So, if Obama and the Democrats are wrong and can't do anything right, and only the Republicans can do it properly, why have a Democracy? Why not strive for a Republican one party state? At least then you wouldn't have to worry about those dastardly lefties and people with a different point of view.

Again, equating Obama with Hitler is just silly (which Paul Broun effectively is) and does nothing for the man's paranoid, one-eyed image.

KN

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama's plan is some sort of forced national service for young people 16-25 years old. He'll probably sneak it in as a requirement for high school graduation and student loans. Obama will get his free labor to work on social programs like picking up garbage in the inner city and cleaning out old people's diapers at public nursing homes, but at the cost of turning a generation of young people against the government (even more effectively than drug laws have). So it will be a net gain for those who hate Socialism and social engineers like Obama.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is from the Yahoo version of this article: "The Obama transition team declined to comment on Broun's remarks. But spokesman Tommy Vietor said Obama was referring in the speech to a proposal for a civilian reserve corps that could handle postwar reconstruction efforts such as rebuilding infrastructure — an idea endorsed by the Bush administration."

It sounds like to me he was talking about several separate things during his speech, such as expanding the US Foreign Service, and creating a force for cleaning up, rebuilding and governing after a war.

As I remember, the idea of creating a force to rebuild and maintain foreign territory after the primary warfare is finished has been talked about before. The lack of such a force during the Iraq war was a common criticism of the handling of the Iraq war.

I'm not sure he is talking about a stateside force at all in this speech. The US already has the National Guard, which, incidentally has been a little bit neglected lately. Obama has talked about beefing up the National Guard in the past, as stated here:

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070701faessay86401/barack-obama/renewing-american-leadership.html?mode=print

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Helter: "You mean kinda like the democrats have looked for the past eight years?"

This from a guy who thinks military spending is a social welfare program! hahaha... hey, I notice you couldn't answer anybody's questions about this on yesterday's threads. Would you care to now? Tell, us, dear Helter, how military spending is part of a social welfare program. And if it IS a social welfare program in your mind, how does bush adding so much to military spending NOT make him a socialist? I mean, Obama wants to give money to Health Care as a social program, and you guys all call him a socialist, communist, Marxist, etc., so bush spending more on war than any other president... wouldn't that make him the biggest socialist in US history by your thinking? Or, could it just be that military spending, health care, and social welfare have nothing to do with each other?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This Congressperson should be canned. It's a shame the election just ended because we saw a number of people trying out this rhetoric kicked out on their cabooses.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Are some of you even aware of what you are saying?

You will say anything to make yourself believe that Obama is evil or something. It's difficult to even have a constructive conversation on today's issues when you have to wade through spin and rhetoric that really is just absurd.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

so, what is going to happen to the military? If he is going to end the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and then still this so called guard out there, wht the heck is the military going to do? You aren't allowed to put them on the borders. If they are only going to be used for search and rescue, I don't think we need them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

smith

This from a guy who thinks military spending is a social welfare program!

I said military spending is a fraction of what the country spends on social welfare programs. I never said military spending is a social welfare program. What a sorry rant on your part. Fail!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Close Guantanamo Obama

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This Congressperson should be canned. " that would be a very dangerous precedent.

while many are gang rushing helter and Romeo, they have a point in looking back in history which shows a negative side to this proposal. Why don't you come up with a positive one?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Talk about paranoia. I hope this is the fringe right, but I'm afraid it's not. When this kind of paranoia comes oozing out when it's still 70 days before Barack takes office, it's not an aberrarion. It's pure hate. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

it's not an aberrarion. It's pure hate" Is that how you felt when FEMA and DHS were created?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I wonder if the gentleman from Georgia and those who sing from the same hymn sheet are not just merely rabid fans of the Swedish pop group Abba. The reason I ask this is that they seem to be plagarizing Abba's greatest hit.

"Paranoia, here we go again, my, my why did I elect you?"

You Americans are certainly funny chaps....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Talk about paranoia.

Hey adaydream. How many times was I told by the left that I'm living in a police state under Bush? Or that the CIA was behind 911? You're really the last person who should be making accusations of paranoia. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is what I used to hear when they first talked about VISTA and Peace Corps in the 70s.

Right now the National Guard is ill equipped to handle the stateside security in case we were attacked by an unfriendly. A civilian force might be beneficial.

How would we have a civilian force if gun sales were banned? You telling me we'd be fighting with sticks and rocks?

That's not how I felt when FEMA and DHS was created because I think too many agencies are under the umbrella of the same large agency. By keeping them broken down to a few more smaller agencies, it protects their independence also. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think when some of george bush's policies are reversed and we see a kinder/gentler United States, this Obama dictatorship will be just an old rumor. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To get a better idea of what obama has in mind, Americans need to look no further than the New Black Panther Party and the Farrakhan's Nation of Islam.

No wonder firearms and ammunition sales have skyrocket since obama won.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

RomeoRamemII - Please tell me which of the 10 points of the New Black Panther Party do you think that Barack will try to enact first? < :-)

http://www.newblackpanther.com/10pointplatform.html

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This Congressperson should be canned. It's a shame the election just ended because we saw a number of people trying out this rhetoric kicked out on their cabooses.

I wouldn't mind canning him. Of course we'd have to ditch all the other lunies in congress as well just to be fair. That would mean that Nancy Pelosi would be out of a job, "Dirty" Harry Reid would be gone, Murtha would be toast, and a huge number of other Dems as well. Sounds like a plan to me. I'll even toss in Trent Lott as a bonus. Aren't I generous.

Oh wait, this would mean that Republicans would have control of both houses of Congress, as the Dems have most of the nuts. Still want to can all the lunatics?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

oh yeah, this obama guy seems like he is going to pursue all the independent minded red-blooded upstanding americans, declare them enemy combatants and ship them off to the gulag ... SORRY wrong country ... to gitmo. it is time to stock up on amo, jerky, and bottled water and move deep into the nevada desert to ride out the next 20 years or so. on the other hand i hear alaska is the real home of the true red-stater mentality ... i hear the gov is your kind-a-gal - wasilla could always use some independence minded upstanding separatist -- you betcha. good luck guys! i'll be rootin' for ya.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

With a huge military expenditure, literally hundreds of federal and local agencies involved in the surveillance of Americans on a day-to-day basis (everyone from Homeland Security to the US Post Office to your local Sheriff), what are the people of the United States afraid of? Your own shadows?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

RR - collectivist agenda -- heck no, i heard that he's ordering extra chains so that he can beat the guiness record for the longest white chain gang!!! it'll be supervised by black panther bosses. the pretext is going to be rebuilding america's infrastructure, but he's planning a living hell for all them white folk and he's gonna make em lose hundreds and hundreds of pounds --- each!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

a new civil service corps

He needs to do something to bring back down to reality all of the Bush regime brainwashed local sheriffs deputies, volunteer first responders, snitch postal delivery people, librarians, teachers, clergy, etc.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't think we have to worry too much about our country becoming a dictatorship, as long as Jay Leno can say stuff like this without fear of being imprisoned:

"And, of course there was a huge celebration over at Barack Obama headquarters, otherwise known as MSNBC."

Nyuk nyuk nyuk!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

timeborder- Isn't it curious that the most powerful country in the world, the United States, has nutjobs who still cower at the thought of some sort of takeover in the middle of the night. By whom and for what reason no one seems to know...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“When he’s proposing to have a national security force that’s answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he’s showing me signs of being Marxist.”

Well, that would not be Marxism. Marx would not approve I think.

“That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did,”

I am not as knowledgeable about Stalin, but Hitler's violent minions were well organized and violent long before he was elected chancellor. Its too late to create a personal force loyal to Obama's every whim now, much too late. You cannot just piece a force together at random and get anything remotely resembling what Hitler had.

But I think some mild skepticism is due with a proposal like this, but for Pete's sake, this is from a speech and details are few. Bringing up Hitler and Stalin at this point is WAY out there, and smacks of being a sore loser. A congressman really should know better.

When we get the details, that will be the time to bring up the dangers. Not just Obama, but whoever follows Obama must also be considered.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He needs to do something to bring back down to reality all of the Bush regime brainwashed local sheriffs deputies, volunteer first responders, snitch postal delivery people, librarians, teachers, clergy, etc.

Oh, I'm laughing my ass off. If that's not attempting to create a dictatorship, mind control. george bush tried to brainwash everybody to believe he was the savior from terrorism. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I said military spending is a fraction of what the country spends on social welfare programs. I never said military spending is a social welfare program. What a sorry rant on your part. Fail!

Yes, you were misunderstood Helter. But you also failed to provide essential evidence for your earlier statements. I say again, FAILED.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“When he’s proposing to have a national security force that’s answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he’s showing me signs of being Marxist.”

Nothing like stating the fact.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's time for a change, remember?

A change from fearmongering. A change from warmongering.

A change from the republican war machine. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

timeborder- Isn't it curious that the most powerful country in the world, the United States, has nutjobs who still cower at the thought of some sort of takeover in the middle of the night. By whom and for what reason no one seems to know...

I would classify the nut job as the one who jumps the gun. But to say it just could not happen? Yeah, the Germans thought so too. The French thought they were safe from kings, and then came Emperor Napoleon. The Italians probably also thought everything would be just fine when they went for Mussolini's "Third Way". It seems like a good idea even now, the only difference is that we have clear hindsight on old Ben.

This congressman's error was not in keeping his eyes open to the possibilities. It was opening his mouth and saying "Hitler and Stalin" before he had anything near sufficient proof. I would keep my mouth shut if they already had not been mentioned.

But, still, I think the writers of this piece sold him down the river a little too much. Be careful to note what is and what is not a quote. The most extreme parts are most certainly NOT quotes. They are "artistic license", and a shame.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"He needs to do something to bring back down to reality all of the Bush regime brainwashed local sheriffs deputies, volunteer first responders, snitch postal delivery people, librarians, teachers, clergy, etc."

That someone could actually believe librarians, the postal service and teachers were in Bush's corner at any time in the last eight years shows just how wildly misinformed many of the people posting here are.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

From the article:

"It may sound a bit crazy and off base"

Well he's certainly sold me on his ideas!

moonbeams: You will say anything to make yourself believe that Obama is evil or something. It's difficult to even have a constructive conversation on today's issues when you have to wade through spin and rhetoric that really is just absurd.

Yep. Unfortunately the radical left set the precedent and now the radical right is following their playbook. Now maybe the radical left will understand how their words sounded to others when they told us that the US was a "police state" with a "shredded Constitution" under Bush. But I'm guessing they'll fail to see the irony.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's the same thing here though.

The fringe right wants you to believe that Barack would be build some covert government also. < :-)

Moderator: Please do not refer to Obama by his first name.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That someone could actually believe librarians, the postal service and teachers were in Bush's corner at any time in the last eight years shows just how wildly misinformed many of the people posting here are.

Of course most weren’t in Bush’s corner. Indeed most were patriotic Americans that knew better than to believe in Bush’s picture of paranoia. But enough of them were so as to create an atmosphere of intimidation. What threat color are we today?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Oh I don't fail to see the irony. But we didn't start pronouncing how radical and absolutely loony george bush was until after he actually started his radical agenda.

Barack doesn't even take the oath for 69 more days and you're crying already. Republican whiners. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So, what happens to Fema and DHS and even the National Guard?

Why are people saying its paranoia, and why from the same people helter points out who were yelling the same when DHS and FEMA were created?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Come up with something new. That was answered hours ago. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“When he’s proposing to have a national security force that’s answering to him" He already has the Marines that do that, don't they?

I guess we'll have to let this ride out.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It may sound a bit crazy and off base

yes it does!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Folks,

Tried to find a little more background on what Obama really meant. Did the old google news search and you guessed it NOTHING.

Thanks Media

Anyway that is why I have to resort to using a Conservative outlet.

Here is the clip of the speech and it's pretty fair as to what the site has to say about it. Sounds like Obama is confusing the issue and misspoke.

But again I'm just guessing. Since the Media didn't do it's job to really let me know by asking the Guy what he meant.

Excerpt

It’s not quite clear what Obama meant by this. If he meant that the military had taken over too many functions that normally should be handled by the State Department, then that echoes what Defense Secretary Robert Gates said this week. It seems to reference the costs associated with reopening consulates and doubling the Peace Corps, but that wouldn’t come close to matching what we spend at the Pentagon. The phrasing of it — a “civilian national security force” — sounds much more like a quasi-military organization operating within the US under the control of the federal government. The media needs to ask Obama about it — but they’d have to report it first:

The link

http://hotair.com/archives/2008/07/17/are-the-media-airbrushing-obamas-speeches/

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“civilian national security force” Hell, we already have that concept embodied in the 2nd amendment, because the first thing tyranny does is go for the weapons like Lexington & Concord. The 2nd wasn't written for hunters. Obama knows that. A “civilian national security force” is simply a stealthy way to negate the perceived need among those in American whom Obama disdains, to continue "clinging to their guns".

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama wants to have a national security force that answers to him because he's afraid the U.S. military may have problems carrying out his orders, since he is absolutely not qualified to be commander in chief.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Have a look at the people around BO (Emanuel, Ross, Susan Rice, Lake, Brzezinski, Daalder, Korb, Reidel, Flynn, Albright,....), Americans and the rest of the world should start to worry.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“It may sound a bit crazy and off base,"

I think Rep. Paul Broun needs to stop right about there.

The sky is falling on our heads - ruuuunnn!!!! :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What Rep Paul Broun is conveniently ignoring during his wild-eyed scare-mongering is a serious - and very real - issue: when the Iraq war winds down and the guns-for-hire working for shady outfits like Blackwater start drifing back Stateside, what are they going to do?

Just take up cushy jobs as accountants and golf course attendants?

They'll be packing heat, too, and lots of it.

Rep Paul Broun needs to be asking the GOP what status these outlaws will have and who they will answer too.

Already Americans are talking about Blackwater armored cars patrolling American suburbs to keep the people under control.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - "Obama wants to have a national security force that answers to him because he's afraid the U.S. military may have problems carrying out his orders, since he is absolutely not qualified to be commander in chief."

LOL!!! That would be even more hilarious if you were serious!! :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sabiwabi...your views of American politics are as off target as your opinions on Japanese history. America has been lucky to survive the Bush, Cheney, Rice, Libby, Wolfowitz, et al collection of neocons. Give Obama some credit -- he is more of a realist than an ideoloque like Bush. That along is a HUGE step in the right direction. Oh, by the way, you forgot to mention that Powell supports his views, and there is talk that Gates may well stay on at Defense. Last I looked, those guys were Bush appointees.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So funny this paranoia... Where was this guy when that was time to warn America about the previsible outcome of Bush projects in Irak ?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sushi: Already Americans are talking about Blackwater armored cars patrolling American suburbs to keep the people under control."

Where? What suburbs?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'll tell you what, I see people all for this and I see people really against this. Man, I am getting real scared for the US. I predict some sort of civil war. YOu got gays fighting with Mormons. Mornoms pissing off Jews by baptising dead Jews. Blacks ready to fight whites, women's groups still hollering how Hillary lost (you just don't get much of that on US MSM), people getting pissed at everything and each other.....

Maybe Obama is right to put some sort of force in place. Of course history shows otherwise sometimes.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So funny this paranoia... Where was this guy when that was time to warn America about the previsible outcome of Bush projects in Irak ?" He most likely was doing what you are doing now except now the shoe is on the other foot. I told you all before, you are all just the mirror of each other.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“It may sound a bit crazy and off base"

Well, yes and no. It's bad enough with ordinary liberals but when you hear Obama saying things like "We are the ones we have been waiting for" you are right to worry.

Democrat Woodrow Wilson was the Barack Obama of his day.

He created a propaganda industry, the first in America, which had 100, 000 men working throughout the country.

His American Protective League was 250,000 strong. They were his own private goons. They had badges. They intimidated people. They beat them. They shot you for not being patriotic enough.

They were like ACORN, but with guns and clubs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

powderfinger,

They were like ACORN

Sounds to me that they were like the current administration.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Sounds to me that they were like the current administration."

Where? In your country? In Japan?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

He created a propaganda industry

aka The Department of Homeland Security

Where? In your country?

Guess

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Haha sarge are you serious? And Bush is I guess "qualified"?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

powderfinger: He (Wilson) created a propaganda industry

Tjrandom: aka The Department of Homeland Security

Was that meant to be humorous? Come back when you have grown up and can debate.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush and the Republicans are the ones who have chipped away at my civil rights. But both parties are socialist anyway.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

powderfinger

Yes – sarcasm is frequently humorous – particularly when there is a thread of truth to it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush and the Republicans are the ones who have chipped away at my civil rights." please tell me what civil rights you have lost? I am only asking..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did,” Broun said. “When he’s proposing to have a national security force . . . he’s showing me signs of being Marxist.”

The most obvious and immediate flaw in this idiot of a congressman's argument is that Hitler was a far cry from a Marxist. Seems Rep Paul Broun has his two greatest boogeymen mixed up, Commies and Dictators. When he gets that all sorted out, maybe I'll give him a closer listen.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tell me what civil rights you have lost? I am only asking..

The right to not have personal correspondence or telephone conversations monitored without legal warrants and probable cause are two relative biggies that spring to mind.

Whether either has actually happened to you personally ('cause they only go after "bad guys," right?) doesn't change the fact that these fundamental rights to privacy having been effectively "Executive Ordered" away is a de facto loss of civil rights.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"It may sound a bit crazy and off base"

I think a politician has no business starting off a public discourse with words like that. Might be okay when your having a beer with your mates, or writing comments on a website like this.. but it "sounds" a bit crazy and off base, and you're not sure about it, don't say it. Especially if it could send weirdos into a tither.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Last I looked, those guys were Bush appointees.

Yes, so why do you expect things to be any different. Don't get me wrong, the McCain/Palin would have been just as scary, if not more. Any Obama past choices were not so different from Bush's. Just have a close look at who is surrounding Obama, evil stuff.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sabi, I like you today. Obama, Bush, Politicians all the same. See, we can agree on some things.

lfr: T"he right to not have personal correspondence or telephone conversations monitored without legal warrants and probable cause are two relative biggies that spring to mind." Ok, I was 50/50 on this until I met a person who was working there... I was ok with it under the circumstances at that time. Besides, how many countries do that without even caring what the public says? Additionally, I was never into talking dirty on the phone..

Whether either has actually happened to you personally ('cause they only go after "bad guys," right?) doesn't change the fact that these fundamental rights to privacy having been effectively "Executive Ordered" away is a de facto loss of civil rights." So, are they, the wire taps, going away?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Funny this ought come from a Republican. It was Bush who cheerfully shredded the Constitution during the last 8 years and who put American on the course of detention without trial and torture through rendition. Then there were the two wars that would have made Hitler proud to call Bush a brother.

This was okay with repugs like Broun.

Saying the Obama is going to be another Woodrow Wilson or whoever at this point is nonsense. The man has not taken office yet.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"It was Bush who cheerfully shredded the Constitution during the last 8 years "

Can you provide just one example of what you are talking about here?

I seriously doubt you can.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipthesong said:

Why are people saying its paranoia, and why from the same people helter points out who were yelling the same when DHS and FEMA were created?

I highly doubt that you were commenting on JT when FEMA was created. Furthermore I doubt that anyone was yelling on JT when FEMA was created. I say this because it was created April 1, 1979. It was moved to DHS under Bush but it had existed long before providing help in disaster situations.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Righteous Right have spoken and the drones are falling into line. It really shows ignorance to invoke the name of Stalin and Hitler. I guess when that is all you got..... The only expansion of socialism is the definition in these NeoCon nuts that believe you could be fascist and a socialist at the same time. The sermons are bound to increase in the future. Let's see the Republicans have already used Hitler, Stalin and the holocaust in their rhetoric. Next weeks sermon is how the Democrats are like the Attila the Hun and then Nero and let's not forget the comparison of Obama to Brutus.

Since all liberals are godless mongrels I don't think we will have to endure any references to the Spanish Inquisition during the Crusades. There is a reason madness was a term resembling anger that referred to insanity. We now have Republicans so bitter their anger has exceeded their capacity to reason. With the recent comparisons we now can say they are out of control.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

From the radical left:

"It was Bush who cheerfully shredded the Constitution during the last 8 years and who put American on the course of detention without trial and torture through rendition. Then there were the two wars that would have made Hitler proud to call Bush a brother."

From the radical right:

“That’s exactly what Hitler did in Nazi Germany and it’s exactly what the Soviet Union did,” Broun said. “When he’s proposing to have a national security force that’s answering to him, that is as strong as the U.S. military, he’s showing me signs of being Marxist.”

Anyone see any difference at all?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sarge - "Obama wants to have a national security force that answers to him because he's afraid the U.S. military may have problems carrying out his orders, since he is absolutely not qualified to be commander in chief."

Bwahahahahahahaha! Then why did the vast majority of US troops help vote Obama into the Presidency, "sarge"?

C'mon, sweetie, is this the best you can do? Well, strike that... I guess it is! xD

0 ( +0 / -0 )

GD: Ok, I had my dates wrong. I actually never heard of FEMA until 9-11..

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dude - "Then why did the vast majority of US troops help vote Obama into the Presidency, "sarge"?"

The "vast majority" didn't. That's just something you made up. If the vast majority of U.S. troops voted for Obama, why the heck would McCain sue the Virginia election board to count all the absentee ballots from miitary members overseas?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What about Obama winning the Presidency? Is that something I just made up? Checking... no, it isn't! Thank Christ!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Again the fear tactic... Republicans are really sore losers...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sarge: "The "vast majority" didn't. That's just something you made up. If the vast majority of U.S. troops voted for Obama, why the heck would McCain sue the Virginia election board to count all the absentee ballots from miitary members overseas?"

Prove it, sarge. I can prove to you that Obama won a MAJOR victory, McCain gave up, and the former will be your next president in January. A large part of that is due to military voting, and that has been stated by those posters who are IN the military. Now, sarge, what facts can you claim? We know you would never set foot in the military, so why do you pretend to speak on their behalf when actual members of the military come on here and prove you wrong? The fact that McCain sued/is suing? And when those ballots come in saying votes for Obama (again) outweigh those for McCain?

sarge, bud, you lost. We forgive you for all your insipid bitterness over the fact, but that doesn't CHANGE the fact. Fortunately, Obama is going to change things for the better in your country, which will have a ripple effect and lead to changes around the world. I just wonder how you'll take to your country being a better place.... hmmm... probably not well, since your ilk seems to thrive on bitterness and denying yourselves of happiness and contentment.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"What about Obama winning the Presidency?"

Backtracking now, I see. Yeah, active duty troops supported McCain 67% to 24% for Obama, according to the Oct.21 Military Times poll. The "vast majority of US troops helped vote Obama into the presidency" my rear end.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well the only people who would of voted may be vets from McCains time because the current admin screwed mil personal (look at the army national guard) and the service men and women are sick of it and wanted change. And lets see how much of the mil is made up of blacks and latins?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The US armed forces want Obama to be their commander in chief?

I'm sorry, but that's too preposterous to let pass uncommented upon.

Below is a link to a comprehensive Military Times survey (more than 80,000 polled) about the most recent presidential election, broken down according race, rank, gender, and branch of military.

http://www.militarytimes.com/static/projects/pages/081003_ep_2pp.pdf

0 ( +0 / -0 )

How about hearing from some people really in the service instead of some armchair warriors and people who quote far from objective 'news sources'. That ought to end this little 'debate'. But of course, we've already had people in the military, as well as vets, come on here and post their feelings, and those have been shot down by said armchair warriors as being false and insincere.

Anyway, Obama won, boys, so if you don't like it, get out. Go live in a dictatorship like you seem to want (bush took away more of your freedoms than any other president in history while purporting it was for 'preserving democracy', etc.). Meanwhile, Obama will make the country a more democratic nation than it's been for 8 years. People like this moronic US congressman will be yet another Republican to lose his seat in the next election. Others like him during the campaigns tried to pull the same crap and were shown the door. Fortunately, the majority of Americans clearly sees the truth and voted in a real leader for a change.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

LFR

The right to not have personal correspondence or telephone conversations monitored without legal warrants and probable cause are two relative biggies that spring to mind.

Where were you Gov. Palin's e-mail got hacked?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind: The difference is LFR is talking about legally approved exemption of your rights, ie. the communist/dictatorial methods you all pretend Obama espouses, vs. a computer hacker committing a crime.

Basically, what you're stating is that what your own government approved is a crime. Doh! Bet you didn't see yourself falling into that moronic step when you took it. You have just singlehandedly admitted you think what your government did was a crime, and that bush's actions were tantamount to a shift towards a dictatorship. Way to go! We knew you could do it, sailwind!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Now here's the big question; it's clear you are against the hacker doing what he did, so are you also against bush's illegal wire-tapping/email information gathering? I've said I'm clearly against both, so how about you state your side; are you also against both, or did you just throw out the hacking bit to show your hypocrisy?

Moderator: Back on topic please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

More from the radical right:

"Barack Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a dictatorship."

And more from the radical left:

"Go live in a dictatorship like you seem to want (bush..."

Any difference?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This has probably been posted already. But in the event it hasn't:

"If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator."

george w. bush

I wonder if the good congressman's worries were piqued then too.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I wonder how much Broun is asking for his tickets to the inauguration.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Paul Broun must be off his rocker or just trying to drum up support through fear. Obama has a liberal agenda (although he downplays it) but that is far from socialist or marxist dictatorship. The senator needs to get a grip and deal in reality as a member of the opposition.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Superlib: Ummm... I realize what you're trying to get at, amigo... but yes, they are VERY different statements with different meanings. One is accusing Obama of producing a dictatorship, the other is suggesting that that's what the senator actually wants. Pointing out irony does not exactly imply one believes the same thing.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sailwind: "So far the Supreme Court has ruled he was within the law. You have a problem with the highest court in the land. Then file a case Smith."

Hahaha!! I KNEW you wouldn't actually be able to respond to your own hypocrisy! That's the problem with you calling out LDF's comment by bringing up the hacker thing; when it backfires on you you turn tail and run. What's more, if you really want to get into it, the whole wiretapping thing was only made legal after it was all done illegally, and if I recall correctly quite a few jobs were placed in jeopardy and more than a few files on what bush and co had done magically disappeared.

Anyway, sailwind, you disappoint me. Leading pretty much up to the final weeks of the election you used to have some credibility; you proved in said final weeks, and do so every day since, that you have lost it. No surprise, really, given whom you support.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I see we're back to the tired, defeated Military Times argument. OK, gang; show me a POST-election poll of how military members voted. That, plus the defeat of the Military Times bit that I've posted before, should be enough.

If not, then I'll just have to fall back on my position as an active dute US military member to lend even more unshakable support to my assertion.

Smith - your 10:11 and 11:00 posts are brilliant. It would be so nice to see the NeoCons get with the program, now that we have a program worth getting with after eight long dark years, but it isn't necessary; we'll triumph without them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Taka -

I wonder if the good congressman's worries were piqued then too.

I doubt they were, but I also doubt this congressman's worries are piqued even now; if this non-story was really a valid issue, it'd've been all over the news way before Election Day, particularly on Fox (a.k.a McCain campaign HQ).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ummm... I realize what you're trying to get at, amigo... but yes, they are VERY different statements with different meanings. One is accusing Obama of producing a dictatorship, the other is suggesting that that's what the senator actually wants. Pointing out irony does not exactly imply one believes the same thing.

It's OK, smith. I've watched you speak out of both sides of your mouth for years. I wasn't expecting a change or anything.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyway, Obama won, boys, so if you don't like it, get out. Go live in a dictatorship like you seem to want (bush took away more of your freedoms than any other president in history while purporting it was for 'preserving democracy', etc.). Meanwhile, Obama will make the country a more democratic nation than it's been for 8 years. People like this moronic US congressman will be yet another Republican to lose his seat in the next election.

Yes, Bush took away my freedom to get blown up by terrorists. Obama wants to give it back. I'd rather lose that particular freedom, thank you very much.

And that congressman will probably have just as much success keeping his seat, as Nancy Pelosi does. Him being in a conservative district, her being in a luny district.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Superlib: You are right on the money in your radical right and radical left comparison statements. My question is where are the people who actually care about the future of America bridging the gap between right and left. The far right and far left are peppered with conspiracy theory nutters and really differ very little from each other.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush took away my freedom to get blown up by terrorists. Obama wants to give it back.

Truly the most moronic statement I've ever read on JT.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USAFdude - I have to agree with you. But some of the radical right actually see it this way.

Now they scare me. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream - Not to worry. The radical right isn't going to harm any American, not on my watch at least.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

usaexpat: I just love the irony of it all. We're seeing "Bush the dictator" vs. "Obama the dictator" with both sides thinking their opinion is somehow rational whereas the other side is made up of nutballs. The radical left inserted themselves into any conversation involving Bush with the goal of hijacking it to vent their personal dislike for the man. Obama's not even President yet and it looks like we're going to see the same trend from the radical right.

Moderator: All readers, please stay on topic.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Like it or not, folks, Barack Obama will be president in a couple of months. You'll agree with some of his policy, disagree with some of it. Just like with every other president before him. Certain things will get better, others will get worse. Just like with every other president before him. After he's served his term, some will call it successful, others will call it unsuccessful. Just like with most other presidents before him.

The only thing that I see changing decidedly for the worse is the highly polarized, fearmongering rhetoric that's flying around in many places, including this forum. Obama won the election, fair and square. And now, as good Americans, it's time to give the man a chance. There will be plenty of time later for those who feel the urge to run around and tell us the sky is falling.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush took away my freedom to get blown up by terrorists. Obama wants to give it back.

Truly the most brilliant statement I've ever read on JT.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bush took away my freedom to get blown up by terrorists. Obama wants to give it back.

Truly the most accurate statement I've ever read on JT.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The only thing that I see changing decidedly for the worse is the highly polarized, fearmongering rhetoric that's flying around in many places, including this forum. Obama won the election, fair and square. And now, as good Americans, it's time to give the man a chance. There will be plenty of time later for those who feel the urge to run around and tell us the sky is falling.

Are you serious? We've had nothing but fearmongering and lies about Bush for years. I don't like him either, as a conservative, hes the guy who trashed my party. But trying to say this polarized atmosphere just started with Barracks election is naive at best. Its been ongoing for years!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream - Not to worry. The radical right isn't going to harm any American, not on my watch at least.

You're being on guard to prevent the right from hurting Americans makes me feel so safe. Or maybe it would if it didn't mean you were ignoring the real threats out there that caused 9/11. Oh, wait, don't tell me you're one of those that think Bush was to blame for it, or one of those conspiracy nuts who think it was all a plot by Bush. Nevermind. I definitely don't feel safe now.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@Molenir: I didn't say this polarized atmosphere just started. I said it's getting worse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Well, not sure I agree. From my perspective it doesn't seem any worse now then it has for years. In fact if anything, it seems a bit lighter at the moment. Previously we would got lots of people just ranting about Bush endlessly regardless of truth. We still get a lot of that. Before that Clinton was the big target. Deservedly so after Lewinsky, and being impeached. I think right now things toward Obama are actually rather tame since he has yet to do anything. Once he's innaugurated, then look for the real partisan infighting to begin. Forget all that tripe about bi-partisanship. No one but the suckers believe it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bow down to the Great Pesident-Elect Obama!! I want statues in every park and round-about. We are humbled by your great presence oh great one.

No matter what anyone says Hillary would have been worse.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nevermind. I definitely don't feel safe now.

Say that to your military family.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No matter what anyone says Hillary would have been worse.

I wouldn't be so sure. At least Hillary likes America.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Not to worry USAFdude. I am a Obama supporter and I have plenty of weapons to protect myself against george bush's friends and the far right.

I'm not worried about some Obama dictatorship. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Helter_Skelter - Barack ran for president because he doesn't like America? Is that your assertion? You honestly believe that? < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Helter_Skelter - Barack ran for president because he doesn't like America? Is that your assertion? You honestly believe that?

After listening to Pastor Wright for 20 years, how could he.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Hillary would have been worse"

I'm not so sure about that. She was right when she said Obama is naive.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream - I don't doubt that you can defend yourself. But the bigger issue for me is that you shouldn't have to defend yourself against other Americans. Obama isn't going to create a dictatorship; he never planned to. But it bothers me greatly that so many people who voted against him are now plotting against him in our own country.

SuperLib has it right: it is tragically ironic. But with all the things I've said about bush over the years, I've certainly never threatened him or plotted against him; nor has anyone else that I know of. That, to me, is where the irony ends, where the exchange of opinions stops and the threat of actual extremism begins.

Hey, I've said some pretty harsh stuff, too, I'll admit it; SuperLib him/herself had to slap me the other night for calling all Republicans non-American. Yeah, I was wrong to generalize like that, and I apologized. Still, it's awfully hard to trust the motives of Obama-haters when they baselessly accuse him of starting a "dictatorship" in America.

I have enough to worry about with terrorists from other countries trying to kill me, my colleagues, and other Americans. No American should have to look over his/her shoulder on their own territory waiting for another American to attack them for supporting President Obama, much less should President Obama need to worry about a home-grown extremist harming him or his family.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Say that to your military family.

Don't need to, unlike you, they all voted for McCain, even if most of them held their noses to do so.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If any president can be considered close to a dictator or Nazi Germany, it's Cheney; ... Bush. Think Patriot Act, the must unpatriotic legistraton in many many years. To paraphrase Franklin, if you give up freedom for security, you're end up with neither.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream

Barack ran for president because he doesn't like America?

Correct. He hates everything that defines America. What do you think this "change" is he's talking about? Are you that naive?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I have enough to worry about with terrorists from other countries trying to kill me, my colleagues, and other Americans. No American should have to look over his/her shoulder on their own territory waiting for another American to attack them for supporting President Obama, much less should President Obama need to worry about a home-grown extremist harming him or his family.

Ok, you need to seriously wake up. What has been going on for the last 8 years, huh? People have been threatening Bush constantly, suggesting he should be hung, poisoned, tortured, and everything else they could think of under the sun. Obama on the other hand, has only had 1 threat, and it was from a couple nutcases who planned to murder a bunch of people, not just him.

While we have a war of words here, and elsewhere on the net, thats all it is, a war of words. A conflict of ideologies and ideas. Unlike those nuts, no one advocates harming Obama. People like myself don't like him, but for me, and I suspect most people, its nothing personal. Its again, a matter of ideas. Of what we all think is best for America.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If any president can be considered close to a dictator or Nazi Germany, it's Cheney; ... Bush. Think Patriot Act, the must unpatriotic legistraton in many many years.

So, what provisions of it were wrong? What didn't you like about it? Do you even have a clue what it does, and did? What changes it brought about? I've seen so many people denouncing it, and most of them don't have the first clue what the patriot act actually does.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Helter_Skelter - What do you think this "change" is he's talking about?

Tax breaks for the middle class.

Do away with the bush tax cuts for the rich.

Get the hell out of Iraq.

Someday, socialized medicine.

Strong schools where the kids learn, not just learn to take test.

Enhance ideas for keeping jobs in the states.

That's just my quick list.

There are more items.

What do you see as his changes he'd push for? < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I suspect the "change" he has planned is to raise taxes by letting the Bush Tax cuts expire.

He'll probably try negotiating with Iran

Probably deal with Pakistan, promising not to invade their airspace, allowing them to harbor terrorists across the border from Afghanistan, thereby getting a lot of people killed.

As you said, socialized medicine, putting a lot of people out of work. Particularly drug companies.

He'll probably invest in infrastructure, proving once again, that government investment doesn't drive the economy nearly as well as less government regulation does.

Try to get the US locked into the global warming hysteria, further destroying our economy.

Yes, lots of change for America. Hey, where do you think all the Canadians that come to the US for decent health care will go once Obama manages to get socialized medicine here in the US?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir -

Unlike those nuts, no one advocates harming Obama

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/05/angry.mccain.supporters/index.html

People have been threatening Bush constantly, suggesting he should be hung, poisoned, tortured, and everything else they could think of under the sun.

Links. Now.

Ok, you need to seriously wake up.

Been awake for a long time. Don't need you to "wake" me up, especially when your arguments are so easily defeated.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USAFdude -

I must have missed it, where in that article did anyone advocate harming either Obama or his family?

And do you really need me to go searching for articles advocating everything against Bush? You would have to have been blind and out of touch with reality to have missed it. Heck, just a moment ago on JT, I was reading another poster that fantasized about Bush being hauled into court for war crimes, in hand cuffs, hanging his head. You get the idea.

And Hey, if you don't want to wake up to reality, thats your choice. Feel free to continue believing what you want, rather then whats real.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

powderfinger

Below is a link to a comprehensive Military Times survey (more than 80,000 polled) about the most recent presidential election, broken down according race, rank, gender, and branch of military.

I don't think 80,000 were polled. Please provide proof of this. Of course I can provide proof that it was only 4293 surveyed and you will also find this statement

"The results of the Military Times 2008 Election Poll are not representative of the opinions of the military as a whole. The group surveyed is older, more senior in rank and less ethnically diverse than the overall armed services."

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2008/10/military~poll~100508w/

You will need to remove the tilda signs (~) and replace them with underscores (_).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir - Your tit-for-tat is boring. Read the article I linked for you. That's the reality of what some sick minds want to do to President Obama.

Now, you'll excuse me; I have real duties in the real world to attend to.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir,

Thanks for saving me the time to respond to adaydream. Just to add to the list:

Our second amendment rights will be trashed with restrictive gun laws and/or bans.

Our first amendment rights will be trashed with the enactment of the "fairness doctrine."

Businesses will be driven out of the country by increased corporate taxes and fines.

Investment in US markets will decrease due to increased capital gains taxes.

He'll decrease our nuclear weapons capabilities without verification other nations are doing same.

There'll be talks about the North American Union.

Teaching about homosexuality will become part of the first-grade curriculum.

Our dependence on foreign oil will be perpetuated, certainly in the near term, by not utilizing domestic energy sources such as oil, coal, and nuclear.

etc.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

USAFdude. I read the article you linked. I read it days ago actually. Where were the threats? Where were the dangers? What, you mean when people were quoted as saying we should do to Obama, everything that the Dems have done to Bush? Or the part where they called him a terrorist? Again, I fail to see the threats to him or his family. Try contrasting that with posts in other forums. Try checking out Moveon, or Huffington. Or like I mentioned before, right here. Theres no comparison. People aren't threatening either Obama or his families lives. They're not hoping someone murders him, while these oh so wonderful, caring people wanted the worst for Bush and Cheney. Talk about Hypocrisy!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just to add my two cents worth to this. IMO, this whole argument can be summed up in two words: Sour grapes.

Those who according to Molenir

voted for McCain, even if most of them held their noses to do so.

saw their party lose, not by a fraction but by a large amount. Some would say by a landslide. Now, it's sour grapes and name calling. Certainly that is what this Congressman is doing.

People worried that JFK was going to hand over the U.S. to the Pope because he was a catholic. Like now, they said the end of the U.S. was at hand, but they were wrong.

If Bush had been such a great president with such great policies and great leadership, then McCain would have been proud to be associated with him and McCain would have had the victory. The fact that Obama won by such a huge majority indicates that the people who loved Bush were in the vast minority.

So, lets all sit back and relax. the U.S. survived Bill Clinton and George Bush. It'll survive Barack Hussein Obama too. Who knows, it might even get better.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The military is the most respected institution in America. It is because of that well-known statistic that I am absolutely confident the majority in the armed forces voted for John McCain and Sarah Palin, and not the two lawyer slicks.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir said:

Or maybe it would if it didn't mean you were ignoring the real threats out there that caused 9/11.

You tell 'em we should have increased our efforts in Afghanistan and should not have gone to Iraq because the crisis has greatly increased and destabilized Pakistan. Oh, that's not what you were saying. That's right that is the Democratic position; get Osama bin Ladin and show al Qaeda that we can go all the way to the top and destroy their leaders. Dumb Democrats think it is important not to create more al Qaeda members through our efforts in Iraq; what the hell could a few extra al Qaeda have to do with our country's security.

It is much easier to misstate the Democratic position then to have a meaningful debate about the new, intelligent administration that will start with an economy that is in tatters, more al Qaeda than when Bush took office, worse relations with members of the security council, an enormous national debt, the lowest consumer confidence in decades and all the major automakers on the brink of disaster. I know conservatives will never give Obama credit for any progress that is made during his administration. When they must resort to comparing Obama to Hitler and Stalin it reflects more on those saying such things then Obama.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Forgive the long post.

I know conservatives will never give Obama credit for any progress that is made during his administration. When they must resort to comparing Obama to Hitler and Stalin it reflects more on those saying such things then Obama.

Of course this also speaks volumes for your own side which has long compared Bush and Cheney to Hitler right. Going along with what you're saying, this reflects more on you and your side, then those saying such things about Bush.

Having said the above. (Why do I always have to defend Bush?) I don't think Iraq was the best move. However warranted it was at the time, the subsequent mistakes there and elsewhere suggests that Bush and his team failed as leaders and planners. (Hey, I'm a conservative, I keep an open mind.)

This said, theres something to the position that says that by fighting in Iraq, we concentrated those that hate us, those that were easily suaded to go there, to oppose us. By doing so, we prevented further attacks in the US. More objectively of course, the people working behind the scenes can always recruit more idiots for Allah to go and kill themselves. But then, by focusing them there in Iraq, the US has been extremely successful in identifying those who are doing a lot of the recruiting.

Do I think the Democrats position is right? Absolutely not. Its important to stabilize Iraq, to stay there as long as they need and want us to stay. Its also important to stabilize Afghanistan. The US started this, it has an obligation to finish it properly. Pulling out is simply not the way to go, and would embolden those who hate America and democracy. They would attack here that much sooner by an immediate pullout, which is what Democrats have long been advocating.

Regarding the destabilization of Pakistan. I would argue that its not the US presence there that destabilizes the region, but that of Al Qaida. Effectively hunting down those groups. Forcing the region back into Pakistani control is something that the new Administration is going to have to achieve.

And how did we get on this topic anyway? Wasn't this supposed to have been about some nutcase in congress, who thinks Obama is going to be the next Hitler?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow!!! Obama hasn't even got into office yet and all the crazies are jumping out of the woodworks to stop him. It is no surprise that those who are making these claims are from the part of the RNC that loved Palin. (Religous,Racist and Education deficient) When is the RNC's civil war going to start?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dang, I meant to hit 'Preview' instead of 'Submit'. I immediately see that I wrote, "I have repeatedly inform people," when I should have written informed instead of inform. Any other mistakes I made I will just have to let my analytical self live with.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As if the repub party wasn't sufficiently in tatters already....

"Sarah" and this guy shrieking on a platform together could be enough to finish off the GOP for good....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

After all these posts I think I'd rather have an Obama dictatorship then a bush freedom regime. The Obama dictatorship is still something that can't be as destructive as the bush regime. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adaydream: don't be so sure but I don't believe the people who are panicking about a dictatorship

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No, I don't either. It's just a debate here amongst friends. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Barack Obama? Capable of becoming a "dictator"? Preposterous!

It's not like he could seduce enough people to fill Invesco Field at Mile High, or Grant Park in Chicago, or the Tiergarten in Berlin -- the way Kim Jong-Il could fill the May Day Stadium in Pyongyang!

Actually, wait a minute...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

powderfinger: I beg to differ, the majority did not vote the republican way.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The GOP doesn't get it. The hate mongering isn't working. He truly shows how much substance some of the Repubs have. Everybody in the GOP is trying to step up and be heard. Trying to be a superstar.

Ms. Palin has already had 8 interviews since losing the election. She is still saying the same tired old stuff. She said I am still concerned about Bill Ayers. If anybody still wants to talk about it, I will," she said. "However, the campaign is over. That chapter is closed. Now is the time to move on and make sure all of us are doing all that we can to progress this nation." Can we say Career First and Country Second? Grade A "Bull".

Basically, it is one part shock media, one part race baiting to get a following with the racists who did vote for McCain and one part stupidity.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"That chapter is closed."

Yep, it's just like Bill Ayers never committed any terrorist acts, and Barack Obama never had any of those meetings with him from 1995 to 2002.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"It may sound a bit crazy and off base..."

It is.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"That chapter is closed"

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/12/palin/index.html

Sarge,

That is a quote from Mrs. Palin. She said it is closed. If you have issue with her flip flopping then you should take it up with her. She is back at her day job now and is still willing to talk about it.

Now, she is going to start butt kissing President Obama to get any possible media opportunity available.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Disgusting comments from this Congressman from Georgia. Hope the Democrats give him an office near the toilets this guy deserves nothing better.

This guy who said this is now saying he is so sorry. BTW he made a mistake on his attempted connection Obama /Hitler.

Just like the far right to try and distort history. Ole adolf was a far right winger you know a neo nazi scum. He and his neos hated the left and anyone even close to the left. Obama is on the left of the spectrum and no where near the far right.

Just when you thought the future was "Palin the Conservative party leader", she is now ready to work with Obama!

Can we say she is looking for another coat to ride?LOL

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/11/palin_ready_to_1.html

Pucker up and kiss up to that Terrorist loving so and so.

Obama/Palin 2012 LOL that is what she wants....LOL

0 ( +0 / -0 )

LOL, this is rich, Bush didn't have his own Gestapo with DHS. Government agencies that should have been seperated for checks, and balances were merged together. For eight years, Rights have been trampled no matter who. If a person said anything about government policy, it's anti-American. ( Like the Dixie Chick). Top Government officals, and friends were allowed to stuff thier pockets from America's coffers without control. ( Halliburton ). Now the government is owning finance institutions. All this sounds like Communist China in the everyday news. keep on spreading the fear. By the way, as for gun control. If you need more than seven bullets ( which most Legal handguns hold ), your doing something wronge. People that buy up alot of weapons has lost thier hard earn money that they can't afford. Thanks to fearmongering. People's weapons will either collect dust, or thier futur children will get into trouble with them. If the government wants you, they'll get you no matter how many guns you have.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It is so, funny that the Georgian wanted to compare him to Hitler. If he was so ignorant he would know that Hitler was a hardcore conservative and would have more in common with the far right of the US. Remember, Obama is suppose to be the super liberal.

The antagonists need to decide if Obama is liberal or conservative.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow, this congressman is classy, "Oh I'm not comparing him to Hitler or anything coughNAZIMARXISTcough, I'm just saying..."

What happened to a person's ability to have tact, and a respectful dialogue?

Obama's victory was a clear message people were tired of many things that happened over the 8 years of Bush, and one of those things were the disgusting amounts of partisan venom.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let me see, an idiot red-neck republican talking about Obama becoming a dictator? I am sure this KKK loving fool would much rather that all Blacks were still on his plantation picking his cotton than in a suit and living in the White House. Hitler? Oh, please! Georgia is a very shameful state. They should be ashamed they have idiot for a congressman!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

elbudamexicano They should be ashamed they have idiot for a congressman!

yes but are they? maybe they shouting praise and wishing for the good old times

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's pathetic to watch these inane right-wingers, whose candidate was soundly trounced by the voters, whimper and whine like a bunch of worried old maids. All Obama need do to meet people's expectations is turn in a better record than Bush, and that should be easy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Barack Obama will establish a Gestapo-like security force to impose a Marxist or fascist dictatorship.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha! oh blimey!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

was not it the Republicans who enforced the "Patriot Act" that stripped the human rights from U.S citizens? What can Obama possibly do to top that?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"was not it the Republicans who enforced the "Patriot Act" that stripped the human rights from U.S citizens? "

Republicans enforced the Patriot Act? Citizens' 'human rights' were stripped?

Do you even know what you are taking about?

Moderator: All readers back on topic please.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Do you even know what you are taking about?

haven't read it?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites