Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Discuss principles, issues, news and candidates related to upcoming elections and voting.
JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by JohnnyL »

Hey, had to pass this along, right? :D
Interesting thoughts here. Would choosing Romney, the lesser of two evils, be best?

-=-=
" The 2012 election has often been described as the most pivotal since 1860.
This statement is not hyperbole. If Barack Obama is re-elected the United
States will never be the same, nor will it be able to re-capture its once
lofty status as the most dominant nation in the history of mankind.

The overwhelming majority of Americans do not understand that Obama's first term
was dedicated to putting in place executive power to enable him and the
administration to fulfill the campaign promise of "transforming America " in
his second term regardless of which political party controls Congress. That
is why his re-election team is virtually ignoring the plight of incumbent or
prospective Democratic Party office holders.

The most significant accomplishment of Obama's first term was to make Congress
irrelevant. Under the myopic and blindly loyal leadership of Harry Reid and
Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats have succeeded in creating an imperial and, in a
second term, a potential dictatorial presidency.

During the first two years of the Obama administration when the Democrats
overwhelming controlled both Houses of Congress and the media was in an Obama
worshiping stupor, a myriad of laws were passed and actions taken which
transferred virtually unlimited power to the executive branch.

The birth of multi-thousand page laws was not an aberration. This
tactic was adopted so the bureaucracy controlled by Obama appointees would
have sole discretion in interpreting vaguely written laws and enforcing
thousands of pages of regulations they and not Congress would subsequently
write.

For example, in the 2,700 pages of ObamaCare there are more than
2,500 references to the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
There are more than 700 instances when he or she is instructed that they
"shall" do something and more than 200 times when they "may" take at their
sole discretion some form of regulatory action. On 139 occasions, the law
mentions that the "Secretary determines." In essence one person, appointed by
and reporting to the president, will be in charge of the health care of 310
million Americans once ObamaCare is fully operational in 2014.

The same is true in the 2,319 pages of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act which
confers nearly unlimited power on various agencies to control by fiat the
nation's financial, banking and investment sectors. The
bill also creates new agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau, not subject to any oversight by Congress. This overall process
was repeated numerous times with other legislation all with the intent of
granting unfettered power to the executive branch controlled
by Barack Obama and his radical associates.

Additionally, the Obama administration has, through its unilaterally
determined rule making and regulatory powers, created laws out of
whole cloth. The Environmental Protection Agency on a near daily basis
issues new regulations clearly out of their purview in order to modify
and change environmental laws previously passed and to impose a
radical green agenda never approved by Congress. The same is true
of the Energy and Interior Departments among many others.

None of these extra-constitutional actions have been challenged by
Congress. The left in America knows this usurpation of power is nearly impossible to
reverse unless stopped in its early stages.

It is clearly the mindset of this administration and its appointees that Congress is
merely a nuisance and can be ignored after they were able to take full
advantage of the useful idiots in the Democrat controlled House and Senate in
2009-2010 and the Democrat Senate in the current Congress.

Additionally, Barack Obama knows after his re-election a Republican controlled
House and Senate will not be able to enact any legislation to roll back the
power previously granted to the Executive Branch or usurped by them.
His veto will not be overridden as there will always be at least 145 Democratic members of the
House or 34 in the Senate in agreement with or intimidated by an
administration more than willing to use Chicago style political tactics.

The stalemate between the Executive and Legislative Branches will inure to the
benefit of Barack Obama and his fellow leftists.

The most significant power Congress has is the control of the purse-strings as
all spending must be approved by them. However, once re-elected, Barack Obama, as
confirmed by his willingness to do or say anything and his unscrupulous re-election tactics,
would not only threaten government shutdowns but would deliberately withhold payments to
those dependent on government support as a means of intimidating and forcing a
Republican controlled Congress to surrender to his demands, thus
neutering their ability to control the administration through spending constraints.

Further, this administration has shown contempt for the courts by ignoring various
court orders, e.g. the Gulf of Mexico oil drilling moratorium, as well as stonewalling
subpoenas and requests issued by Congress. The Eric Holder Justice Department
has become the epitome of corruption as part of the most dishonest and deceitful
administration in American history. In a second term the arrogance of Barack Obama
and his minions will become more blatant as he will not have to be concerned with
re-election.

Who will be there to enforce the rule of law, a Supreme Court ruling or the
Constitution? No one. Barack Obama and his fellow-travelers will be
unchallenged as they run roughshod over the American people.

Many Republicans and conservatives dissatisfied with the prospect
of Mitt Romney as the nominee for president are instead focused
on re-taking the House and Senate. That goal, while worthy and
necessary, is meaningless unless Barack Obama is defeated . The
nation is not dealing with a person of character and integrity but someone of
single-minded purpose and overwhelming narcissism. Judging
by his actions, words and deeds during his first term, he does not intend to
work with Congress, either Republican or Democrat in his second term but
rather to force his radical agenda on the American people through
the power he has usurped or been granted.

The governmental structure of the United States was set up by the
founders in the hope that over the years only those people of high moral character and
integrity would assume the reins of power. However, knowing that was not
always possible, they dispersed power over three distinct and independent
branches as a check on each other.

What they could not imagine is the surrender and abdication of its constitutional
duty by the preeminent governmental branch, the Congress, to a chief
executive devoid of any character or integrity coupled with a judiciary essentially powerless
to enforce the law when the chief executive ignores them.

Conservatives, Libertarians, the Republican Party and Mitt Romney must come to grips with
this moment in time and their historical role in denying Barack Obama and his
minions their ultimate goal. All resources must be directed at that end-game
and not merely controlling Congress and the various committee chairmanships.

Steve McCann"

wethepeopleusa
Hi, I'm new.
Posts: 8

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by wethepeopleusa »

No Obama does not need to be reelected. If he is I agree that our country will be ruined. If you would like to let some of the representatives know for free please visit we-the-people-usa.com. I just did and it only took a minute.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by freedomforall »

Not everyone on the forum will see this post, but it could be brought to their attention by word of mouth [in this case, post reference]. I hope Wayne Root is correct. I got this in an email:

Las Vegas Odds Maker's Prediction

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/landslide.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://townhall.com/columnists/wayneall ... _landslide" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting observation

DIRECT FROM CAESAR’S PALACE

A Las Vegas "odds maker" gives his reasons for big win by Romney in November.

Most political predictions are made by biased pollsters, pundits, or prognosticators who are either rooting for Republicans or Democrats. I am neither. I am a former Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee, and a well-known Vegas odds maker with one of the most accurate records of predicting political races.

But as an odds maker with a pretty remarkable track record of picking political races, I play no favorites. I simply use common sense to call them as I see them. Back in late December I released my New Year's Predictions.

I predicted back then- before a single GOP primary had been held, with Romney trailing for months to almost every GOP competitor from Rick Perry to Herman Cain to Newt- that Romney would easily rout his competition to win the GOP nomination by a landslide. I also predicted that the Presidential race between Obama and Romney would be very close until Election Day. But that on Election Day Romney would win by a landslide similar to Reagan-Carter in 1980.

Understanding history, today I am even more convinced of a resounding Romney victory. 32 years ago at this moment in time, Reagan was losing by 9 points to Carter. Romney is right now running even in polls. So why do most pollsters give Obama the edge?

First, most pollsters are missing one ingredient- common sense. Here is my gut instinct. Not one American who voted for McCain 4 years ago will switch to Obama. Not one in all the land. But many millions of people who voted for an unknown Obama 4 years ago are angry, disillusioned, turned off, or scared about the future. Voters know Obama now- and that is a bad harbinger.

Now to an analysis of the voting blocks that matter in U.S. politics:

**Black voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. His endorsement of gay marriage has alienated many black church-going Christians.
He may get 88% of their vote instead of the 96% he got in 2008. This is not good news for Obama.

**Jewish voters. Obama has been weak in his support of Israel. Many Jewish voters and big donors are angry and disappointed.

I predict Obama's Jewish support drops from 78% in 2008 to the low 60's. This is not good news for Obama.

**Youth voters. Obama's biggest and most enthusiastic believers from 4 years ago have graduated into a job market from hell. Young people are disillusioned, frightened, and broke- a bad combination. The enthusiasm is long gone. Turnout will be much lower among young voters, as will actual voting percentages. This not good news for Obama!

**Catholic voters. Obama won a majority of Catholics in 2008. That won't happen again. Out of desperation to please women, Obama went to war with the Catholic Church over contraception. Now he is being sued by the Catholic Church. Majority lost. This is not good news for Obama.

**Small Business owners. Because I ran for Vice President last time around, and I'm a small businessman myself, I know literally thousands of small business owners. At least 40% of them in my circle of friends, fans and supporters voted for Obama 4 years ago to give someone different a chance. As I warned them that he would pursue a war on capitalism and demonize anyone who owned a business...that he'd support unions over the private sector in a big way...that he'd overwhelm the economy with spending and debt. My friends didn't listen. Four years later, I can't find one person in my circle of small business owner friends voting for Obama. Not one. This is not good news for Obama.

**Blue collar working class whites. Do I need to say a thing? White working class voters are about as happy with Obama as Boston Red Sox fans feel about the New York Yankees. This is not good news for Obama.

**Suburban moms. The issue isn't contraception; it's having a job to pay for contraception. Obama's economy frightens these moms. They are worried about putting food on the table. They fear for their children's future. This is not good news for Obama.

**Military Veterans. McCain won this group by 10 points. Romney is winning by 24 points. The more our military vets got to see of Obama, the more they disliked him. This is not good news for Obama.

Add it up. Is there one major group where Obama has gained since 2008? Will anyone in America wake up on election day saying, I didn't vote for Obama 4 years ago, but he's done such a fantastic job, I can't wait to vote for him today. Does anyone feel that a vote for Obama makes their job more secure?

Forget the polls. My gut instincts as a Vegas odds maker and common sense small businessman tell me this will be a historic landslide and a world-class repudiation of Obama's radical and risky socialist agenda. It's Reagan-Carter all over again.

But I'll give Obama credit for one thing- he is living proof that familiarity breeds contempt.

Wayne Allyn Root

See: http://townhall.com/columnists/wayneall ... _landslide" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by JohnnyL »

freedomfighter wrote:Not everyone on the forum will see this post, but it could be brought to their attention by word of mouth [in this case, post reference]. I hope Wayne Root is correct. I got this in an email:

Las Vegas Odds Maker's Prediction

http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/landslide.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://townhall.com/columnists/wayneall ... _landslide" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Interesting observation

DIRECT FROM CAESAR’S PALACE

A Las Vegas "odds maker" gives his reasons for big win by Romney in November.

Most political predictions are made by biased pollsters, pundits, or prognosticators who are either rooting for Republicans or Democrats. I am neither. I am a former Libertarian Vice Presidential nominee, and a well-known Vegas odds maker with one of the most accurate records of predicting political races.

But as an odds maker with a pretty remarkable track record of picking political races, I play no favorites. I simply use common sense to call them as I see them. Back in late December I released my New Year's Predictions.

I predicted back then- before a single GOP primary had been held, with Romney trailing for months to almost every GOP competitor from Rick Perry to Herman Cain to Newt- that Romney would easily rout his competition to win the GOP nomination by a landslide. I also predicted that the Presidential race between Obama and Romney would be very close until Election Day. But that on Election Day Romney would win by a landslide similar to Reagan-Carter in 1980.

Understanding history, today I am even more convinced of a resounding Romney victory. 32 years ago at this moment in time, Reagan was losing by 9 points to Carter. Romney is right now running even in polls. So why do most pollsters give Obama the edge?

First, most pollsters are missing one ingredient- common sense. Here is my gut instinct. Not one American who voted for McCain 4 years ago will switch to Obama. Not one in all the land. But many millions of people who voted for an unknown Obama 4 years ago are angry, disillusioned, turned off, or scared about the future. Voters know Obama now- and that is a bad harbinger.

Now to an analysis of the voting blocks that matter in U.S. politics:

**Black voters. Obama has nowhere to go but down among this group. His endorsement of gay marriage has alienated many black church-going Christians.
He may get 88% of their vote instead of the 96% he got in 2008. This is not good news for Obama.

**Jewish voters. Obama has been weak in his support of Israel. Many Jewish voters and big donors are angry and disappointed.

I predict Obama's Jewish support drops from 78% in 2008 to the low 60's. This is not good news for Obama.

**Youth voters. Obama's biggest and most enthusiastic believers from 4 years ago have graduated into a job market from hell. Young people are disillusioned, frightened, and broke- a bad combination. The enthusiasm is long gone. Turnout will be much lower among young voters, as will actual voting percentages. This not good news for Obama!

**Catholic voters. Obama won a majority of Catholics in 2008. That won't happen again. Out of desperation to please women, Obama went to war with the Catholic Church over contraception. Now he is being sued by the Catholic Church. Majority lost. This is not good news for Obama.

**Small Business owners. Because I ran for Vice President last time around, and I'm a small businessman myself, I know literally thousands of small business owners. At least 40% of them in my circle of friends, fans and supporters voted for Obama 4 years ago to give someone different a chance. As I warned them that he would pursue a war on capitalism and demonize anyone who owned a business...that he'd support unions over the private sector in a big way...that he'd overwhelm the economy with spending and debt. My friends didn't listen. Four years later, I can't find one person in my circle of small business owner friends voting for Obama. Not one. This is not good news for Obama.

**Blue collar working class whites. Do I need to say a thing? White working class voters are about as happy with Obama as Boston Red Sox fans feel about the New York Yankees. This is not good news for Obama.

**Suburban moms. The issue isn't contraception; it's having a job to pay for contraception. Obama's economy frightens these moms. They are worried about putting food on the table. They fear for their children's future. This is not good news for Obama.

**Military Veterans. McCain won this group by 10 points. Romney is winning by 24 points. The more our military vets got to see of Obama, the more they disliked him. This is not good news for Obama.

Add it up. Is there one major group where Obama has gained since 2008? Will anyone in America wake up on election day saying, I didn't vote for Obama 4 years ago, but he's done such a fantastic job, I can't wait to vote for him today. Does anyone feel that a vote for Obama makes their job more secure?

Forget the polls. My gut instincts as a Vegas odds maker and common sense small businessman tell me this will be a historic landslide and a world-class repudiation of Obama's radical and risky socialist agenda. It's Reagan-Carter all over again.

But I'll give Obama credit for one thing- he is living proof that familiarity breeds contempt.

Wayne Allyn Root

See: http://townhall.com/columnists/wayneall ... _landslide" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
So true--If you want the real deal on the numbers and chances, call your bookie!

User avatar
Songbird
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1558
Location: South Central Iowa

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by Songbird »

Johnny ~ Where'd you get this? Is there a link?
JohnnyL wrote:Hey, had to pass this along, right? :D
Interesting thoughts here. Would choosing Romney, the lesser of two evils, be best?

-=-=
" The 2012 election has often been described as the most pivotal since 1860.
This statement is not hyperbole. If Barack Obama is re-elected the United
States will never be the same, nor will it be able to re-capture its once
lofty status as the most dominant nation in the history of mankind.

The overwhelming majority of Americans do not understand that Obama's first term
was dedicated to putting in place executive power to enable him and the
administration to fulfill the campaign promise of "transforming America " in
his second term regardless of which political party controls Congress. That
is why his re-election team is virtually ignoring the plight of incumbent or
prospective Democratic Party office holders.

The most significant accomplishment of Obama's first term was to make Congress
irrelevant. Under the myopic and blindly loyal leadership of Harry Reid and
Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats have succeeded in creating an imperial and, in a
second term, a potential dictatorial presidency.

During the first two years of the Obama administration when the Democrats
overwhelming controlled both Houses of Congress and the media was in an Obama
worshiping stupor, a myriad of laws were passed and actions taken which
transferred virtually unlimited power to the executive branch.

The birth of multi-thousand page laws was not an aberration. This
tactic was adopted so the bureaucracy controlled by Obama appointees would
have sole discretion in interpreting vaguely written laws and enforcing
thousands of pages of regulations they and not Congress would subsequently
write.

For example, in the 2,700 pages of ObamaCare there are more than
2,500 references to the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
There are more than 700 instances when he or she is instructed that they
"shall" do something and more than 200 times when they "may" take at their
sole discretion some form of regulatory action. On 139 occasions, the law
mentions that the "Secretary determines." In essence one person, appointed by
and reporting to the president, will be in charge of the health care of 310
million Americans once ObamaCare is fully operational in 2014.

The same is true in the 2,319 pages of the Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act which
confers nearly unlimited power on various agencies to control by fiat the
nation's financial, banking and investment sectors. The
bill also creates new agencies, such as the Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau, not subject to any oversight by Congress. This overall process
was repeated numerous times with other legislation all with the intent of
granting unfettered power to the executive branch controlled
by Barack Obama and his radical associates.

Additionally, the Obama administration has, through its unilaterally
determined rule making and regulatory powers, created laws out of
whole cloth. The Environmental Protection Agency on a near daily basis
issues new regulations clearly out of their purview in order to modify
and change environmental laws previously passed and to impose a
radical green agenda never approved by Congress. The same is true
of the Energy and Interior Departments among many others.

None of these extra-constitutional actions have been challenged by
Congress. The left in America knows this usurpation of power is nearly impossible to
reverse unless stopped in its early stages.

It is clearly the mindset of this administration and its appointees that Congress is
merely a nuisance and can be ignored after they were able to take full
advantage of the useful idiots in the Democrat controlled House and Senate in
2009-2010 and the Democrat Senate in the current Congress.

Additionally, Barack Obama knows after his re-election a Republican controlled
House and Senate will not be able to enact any legislation to roll back the
power previously granted to the Executive Branch or usurped by them.
His veto will not be overridden as there will always be at least 145 Democratic members of the
House or 34 in the Senate in agreement with or intimidated by an
administration more than willing to use Chicago style political tactics.

The stalemate between the Executive and Legislative Branches will inure to the
benefit of Barack Obama and his fellow leftists.

The most significant power Congress has is the control of the purse-strings as
all spending must be approved by them. However, once re-elected, Barack Obama, as
confirmed by his willingness to do or say anything and his unscrupulous re-election tactics,
would not only threaten government shutdowns but would deliberately withhold payments to
those dependent on government support as a means of intimidating and forcing a
Republican controlled Congress to surrender to his demands, thus
neutering their ability to control the administration through spending constraints.

Further, this administration has shown contempt for the courts by ignoring various
court orders, e.g. the Gulf of Mexico oil drilling moratorium, as well as stonewalling
subpoenas and requests issued by Congress. The Eric Holder Justice Department
has become the epitome of corruption as part of the most dishonest and deceitful
administration in American history. In a second term the arrogance of Barack Obama
and his minions will become more blatant as he will not have to be concerned with
re-election.

Who will be there to enforce the rule of law, a Supreme Court ruling or the
Constitution? No one. Barack Obama and his fellow-travelers will be
unchallenged as they run roughshod over the American people.

Many Republicans and conservatives dissatisfied with the prospect
of Mitt Romney as the nominee for president are instead focused
on re-taking the House and Senate. That goal, while worthy and
necessary, is meaningless unless Barack Obama is defeated . The
nation is not dealing with a person of character and integrity but someone of
single-minded purpose and overwhelming narcissism. Judging
by his actions, words and deeds during his first term, he does not intend to
work with Congress, either Republican or Democrat in his second term but
rather to force his radical agenda on the American people through
the power he has usurped or been granted.

The governmental structure of the United States was set up by the
founders in the hope that over the years only those people of high moral character and
integrity would assume the reins of power. However, knowing that was not
always possible, they dispersed power over three distinct and independent
branches as a check on each other.

What they could not imagine is the surrender and abdication of its constitutional
duty by the preeminent governmental branch, the Congress, to a chief
executive devoid of any character or integrity coupled with a judiciary essentially powerless
to enforce the law when the chief executive ignores them.

Conservatives, Libertarians, the Republican Party and Mitt Romney must come to grips with
this moment in time and their historical role in denying Barack Obama and his
minions their ultimate goal. All resources must be directed at that end-game
and not merely controlling Congress and the various committee chairmanships.

Steve McCann"

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by JohnnyL »

But it's NOT all looking very good for Romney.

Go here: http://rense.com/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; and look at all the Romney parts:

~for nuclear energy,
~top advisor is Dov Zakheim (generally thought of as a/the brain behind 911),
~wants one world economy,
~Bains Capital a front for the Bush cartel,
~Zionist Jews biggest donors to presidential bids of Obama, Romney,
~Romney In Lockstep With Goals Of Zionism,
~Romney-Ryan More Militarized Version Of Bush...

But, worst of all--does it even matter??
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2012/10/21 ... -election/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by JohnnyL »

Songbird,

A link: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/05/ ... plans.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by freedomforall »

Another Wayne Allyn Root piece:

Obama's agenda: Overwhelm the system

Rahm Emanuel cynically said, "You never want a crisis to go to waste." It is now becoming clear that the crisis he was referring to is Barack Obama's presidency.

Obama is no fool. He is not incompetent. To the contrary, he is brilliant. He knows exactly what he's doing. He is purposely overwhelming the U.S. economy to create systemic failure, economic crisis and social chaos -- thereby destroying capitalism and our country from within.Â

Barack Obama is my college classmate (Columbia University, class of '83). As Glenn Beck correctly predicted from day one, Obama is following the plan of Cloward & Piven, two professors at Columbia University. They outlined a plan to socialize America by overwhelming the system with government spending and entitlement demands. Add up the clues below. Taken individually they're alarming. Taken as a whole, it is a brilliant, Machiavellian game plan to turn the United States into a socialist/Marxist state with a permanent majority that desperately needs government for survival ... and can be counted on to always vote for bigger government. Why not? They have no responsibility to pay for it.

-- Universal health care. The health care bill had very little to do with health care. It had everything to do with unionizing millions of hospital and health care workers, as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions). Obama doesn't care that giving free health care to 30 million Americans will add trillions to the national debt. What he does care about is that it cements the dependence of those 30 million voters to Democrats and big government. Who but a socialist revolutionary would pass this reckless spending bill in the middle of a depression?

-- Cap and trade. Like health care legislation having nothing to do with health care, cap and trade has nothing to do with global warming. It has everything to do with redistribution of income, government control of the economy and a criminal payoff to Obama's biggest contributors. Those powerful and wealthy unions and contributors (like GE, which owns NBC, MSNBC and CNBC) can then be counted on to support everything Obama wants. They will kick-back hundreds of millions of dollars in contributions to Obama and the Democratic Party to keep them in power. The bonus is that all the new taxes on Americans with bigger cars, bigger homes and businesses helps Obama "spread the wealth around."

-- Make Puerto Rico a state. Why? Who's asking for a 51st state? Who's asking for millions of new welfare recipients and government entitlement addicts in the middle of a depression? Certainly not American taxpayers. But this has been Obama's plan all along. His goal is to add two new Democrat senators, five Democrat congressman and a million loyal Democratic voters who are dependent on big government.

-- Legalize 12 million illegal immigrants. Just giving these 12 million potential new citizens free health care alone could overwhelm the system and bankrupt America. But it adds 12 million reliable new Democrat voters who can be counted on to support big government. Add another few trillion dollars in welfare, aid to dependent children, food stamps, free medical, education, tax credits for the poor, and eventually Social Security.

-- Stimulus and bailouts. Where did all that money go? It went to Democrat contributors, organizations (ACORN), and unions -- including billions of dollars to save or create jobs of government employees across the country. It went to save GM and Chrysler so that their employees could keep paying union dues. It went to AIG so that Goldman Sachs could be bailed out (after giving Obama almost $1 million in contributions). A staggering $125 billion went to teachers (thereby protecting their union dues). All those public employees will vote loyally Democrat to protect their bloated salaries and pensions that are bankrupting America. The country goes broke, future generations face a bleak future, but Obama, the Democrat Party, government, and the unions grow more powerful. The ends justify the means.

-- Raise taxes on small business owners, high-income earners, and job creators. Put the entire burden on only the top 20 percent of taxpayers, redistribute the income, punish success, and reward those who did nothing to deserve it (except vote for Obama). Reagan wanted to dramatically cut taxes in order to starve the government. Obama wants to dramatically raise taxes to starve his political opposition.

With the acts outlined above, Obama and his regime have created a vast and rapidly expanding constituency of voters dependent on big government; a vast privileged class of public employees who work for big government; and a government dedicated to destroying capitalism and installing themselves as socialist rulers by overwhelming the system.

Add it up and you've got the perfect Marxist scheme -- all devised by my Columbia University college classmate Barack Obama.

Wayne Allyn Root was the 2008 Libertarian Party vice presidential nominee and serves on the Libertarian National Committee.

See: http://www.lvrj.com/opinion/obama-s-age ... 16764.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by freedomforall »

Did anyone pick up on one phrase used by Obama over and over during the debates? It was in general "what we need." (Non committal.) I didn't hear him say "what I will do." which is more committal. From his track record thus far we know he's more interested in destroying America. He's weakening us until we fall into the hands of Satan's minions.

I like where recently David Letterman announced on his show that Obama was wrong in calling Romney a liar over the auto industry. Obama continues to tell whoppers at every turn in an attempt to pull wool over everyone's eyes.

User avatar
George Alabaster
captain of 100
Posts: 237
Location: Oregon

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by George Alabaster »

freedomfighter wrote:...as well as adding 15,000 to 20,000 new IRS agents (who will join government employee unions).
...
Not true:
http://www.politifact.com/georgia/state ... -health-c/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
While there will need to be more money spent on enforcement, it's in the hundreds of people and only about 10% of those will be agents. This is a fabricated number based on budget requirements translated into jobs, but much of that money will need to be spent on more mundane things like offices and desks.

I find it amazing that Christians would balk at health care but think absolutely nothing of spending 2 trillion on weapons the Military says it doesn't even need. Where's the compassion? If we bankrupt our country giving people health care, we will be poor, but at least we will be healthy!

"If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me."
Jesus




-George

Thomas
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4622

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by Thomas »

The first post is not quite accurate in that it blames Obama for taking power for the president. One of Obama's platform themes, during the 08 election, was overturning what Bush had done in this area. Bush probably siezed more power for the president than any other president. Obama has not lived up to his promise and has made things worse.

The focus on Obama as the bad guy is counter productive and draws attention away from the reality that both partys are corrupt and are turning this country into a dictatership. Romney has given no indication that intends to change anything and has surrouned himself with neo-con advisers, much like Bush.

Nothing will change with Romney.

User avatar
creator
(of the Forum)
Posts: 8240
Location: The Matrix
Contact:

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by creator »

George Alabaster wrote:If we bankrupt our country giving people health care, we will be poor, but at least we will be healthy!
Government "Health Care" programs don't make people healthy. Healthy lifestyles make people healthy. The pharmaceutical and 'health care' industry kills a lot of people, and for the most part they just cover up problems, instead of actually getting to the root of it... hmmm, the same way our gadianton controlled governments are run.

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by JohnnyL »

BrianM wrote:
George Alabaster wrote:If we bankrupt our country giving people health care, we will be poor, but at least we will be healthy!
Government "Health Care" programs don't make people healthy. Healthy lifestyles make people healthy. The pharmaceutical and 'health care' industry kills a lot of people, and for the most part they just cover up problems, instead of actually getting to the root of it... hmmm, the same way our gadianton controlled governments are run.
It's a catch-22. Most people don't want to pay the price of living an uneducated, uncontrolled lifestyle. Frankly, they don't need to. The medical system can make them pay for it. And that won't fix them, it will just fix them up. ;)
What I DON'T agree to is others paying for it. Especially when (20 years ago), according to the bill, a bandaid cost $14. At that price, I prefer to buy and use my own, thank you!
The focus on Obama as the bad guy is counter productive and draws attention away from the reality that both partys are corrupt and are turning this country into a dictatership. Romney has given no indication that intends to change anything and has surrouned himself with neo-con advisers, much like Bush.
Unfortunately, I agree. Unfortunate not that I agree with YOU, but with what you said. Both are bad men.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by freedomforall »

Shocking New Report: Obama Administration denied 3 calls for help in Benghazi.

Watch videos here: http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/10/26/sho ... 142_174150" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Obama The Great gets busted more and more.

JohnnyL
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 9830

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by JohnnyL »

freedomfighter wrote:Shocking New Report: Obama Administration denied 3 calls for help in Benghazi.

Watch videos here: http://www.glennbeck.com/2012/10/26/sho ... 142_174150" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Obama The Great gets busted more and more.
They all do, they all will.
Let's not forget it's not really them doing it...

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by freedomforall »

CONSERVATISM IS CALLING

http://www.youtube.com/v/gsa4uLmTw0M" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


User avatar
George Alabaster
captain of 100
Posts: 237
Location: Oregon

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by George Alabaster »

BrianM wrote:
George Alabaster wrote:If we bankrupt our country giving people health care, we will be poor, but at least we will be healthy!
Government "Health Care" programs don't make people healthy. Healthy lifestyles make people healthy. The pharmaceutical and 'health care' industry kills a lot of people, and for the most part they just cover up problems, instead of actually getting to the root of it... hmmm, the same way our gadianton controlled governments are run.
BrianM,

Not so sure that's true. Do you have anyone in your family that ever got cancer or some other serious condition? Have you tried treating something like diabetes on your own? Lifestyle is a big part of it, but so is genetics.

George

User avatar
George Alabaster
captain of 100
Posts: 237
Location: Oregon

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by George Alabaster »

JohnnyL wrote:
freedomfighter wrote:Shocking New Report: Obama Administration denied 3 calls for help in Benghazi.

...

Obama The Great gets busted more and more.
They all do, they all will.
Let's not forget it's not really them doing it...

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood denied claims that any requests for support were turned down. She said: “We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need: claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”


http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2 ... to-reason/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
hopeNlove
captain of 50
Posts: 99

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by hopeNlove »

If the CIA says there were no orders to stand down then why are an Admiral and Army General fired?

http://patriotsforamerica.ning.com/foru ... yan-rescue" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

According to this report, yesterday (27 October) Obama ordered the immediate removal of Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette from his command of the powerful Carrier Strike Group Three (CSG-3) currently located in the Middle East.
CSG-3 is one of five US Navy carrier strike groups currently assigned to the US Pacific Fleet. US Navy carrier strike groups are employed in a variety of roles, which involve gaining and maintaining sea control and projecting power ashore, as well as projecting naval airpower ashore.
The aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74) is the strike group’s current flagship, and as of 2012, other units assigned to Carrier Strike Group Three include Carrier Air Wing Nine; the guided-missile cruisers USS Mobile Bay (CG-53) and USS Antietam (CG-54); and the ships of Destroyer Squadron 21, the guided-missile destroyers USS Wayne E. Meyer (DDG-108), USS Dewey (DDG-105), USS Kidd (DDG-100), and USS Milius (DDG-69).
US news reports on Obama’s unprecedented firing of a powerful US Navy Commander during wartime state that Admiral Gaouette’s removal was for “allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment” that arose during the strike group’s deployment to the Middle East.
This GRU report, however, states that Admiral Gaouette’s firing by President Obama was due to this strike force commander disobeying orders when he ordered his forces on 11 September to “assist and provide intelligence for” American military forces ordered into action by US Army General Carter Ham, who was then the commander of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), against terrorist forces attacking the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
General Ham had been in command of the initial 2011 US-NATO military intervention in Libya who, like Admiral Gaouette, was fired by Obama. And as we can, in part, read from US military insider accounts of this growing internal conflict between the White House and US Military leaders:
“The information I heard today was that General [Carter] Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.
General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.”
Read more here: http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum ... 032156/pg1" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
George Alabaster
captain of 100
Posts: 237
Location: Oregon

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by George Alabaster »

And naturally, if that's true, you know that there could be no good reason for Obama to give that order? If true it does raise questions, but the source of this statement is questionable itself.

George

P.S.:

The Navy on Wednesday said that the abrupt removal of an admiral commanding a Mideast aircraft carrier group was not related to the Sept. 11 U.S. consulate attack in Libya, refuting Internet rumors in the week leading up to the U.S. presidential election...

On Wednesday, Rear Adm. John Kirby, chief of naval information at the Pentagon, called the speculation about the consulate flat wrong.
“Rumors of this having anything to do with Libya and the Benghazi attack are simply false and ridiculous,” Kirby said...

On Monday, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey issued a statement saying that Army Gen. Carter Ham –- leader of U.S. Africa Command -- is leaving as part of "routine succession planning." A civilian Pentagon spokesman said that Ham is retiring.

Link

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by freedomforall »

George Alabaster wrote:
JohnnyL wrote:
freedomfighter wrote:Shocking New Report: Obama Administration denied 3 calls for help in Benghazi.

...

Obama The Great gets busted more and more.
They all do, they all will.
Let's not forget it's not really them doing it...

CIA spokeswoman Jennifer Youngblood denied claims that any requests for support were turned down. She said: “We can say with confidence that the Agency reacted quickly to aid our colleagues during that terrible evening in Benghazi. Moreover, no one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need: claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate.”


http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2 ... to-reason/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Oh, now i get it...all the CIA personnel are honest, upright citizens. I shouldn't have questioned their integrity. And those who asked for help just made it all up...they were bored and decided to send up a false flag. Then there are those involved with trying to help...they're just too gullible. Ya, right!

User avatar
George Alabaster
captain of 100
Posts: 237
Location: Oregon

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by George Alabaster »

freedomfighter wrote:
Oh, now i get it...all the CIA personnel are honest, upright citizens. I shouldn't have questioned their integrity. And those who asked for help just made it all up...they were bored and decided to send up a false flag. Then there are those involved with trying to help...they're just too gullible. Ya, right!
Do you have any reason to take either's word on faith? Other than the fact that one seems to support your pre-determined opinion on Obama?

George

User avatar
gkearney
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5346

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by gkearney »

There is presadent for reliving a commander in wartime it has happened a couple of time. Notable was when Truman relieved MacAurther for disobeying orders in the Korean War. What ever you may think about this maintaining civilian control over the military is vital to a free nation and military officers must obay lawful orders of their civilian superiors. To do otherwise invites trouble.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by freedomforall »

George Alabaster wrote:
freedomfighter wrote:
Oh, now i get it...all the CIA personnel are honest, upright citizens. I shouldn't have questioned their integrity. And those who asked for help just made it all up...they were bored and decided to send up a false flag. Then there are those involved with trying to help...they're just too gullible. Ya, right!
Do you have any reason to take either's word on faith? Other than the fact that one seems to support your pre-determined opinion on Obama?

George
You must be an Obama fan. It is as plain as the eyes in your sockets that Obama is bent on destroying what's left or our freedoms, and to usher in Socialism in its fullest. Almost everything he has done is clearly against the Constitution. And you have the audacity to defend him?

He has weakened our defense by cutting back on the military. A socialistic tactic.
He has practically bankrupted this country so as to put us into our enemies hands. A socialist tactic.
He has enacted government run healthcare, against the constitution. A socialist tactic.
He wants homosexuals to be able to marry without opposition. A socialist tactic.
He wants churches to provide contraceptives. A socialist tactic.
He wants women to be able to kill their unborn babies. A socialist tactic.
He has interfered with free enterprise, with bailouts and loss of jobs. A socialist tactic.
He has boldly mocked the Bible in front of the nation...and God. Doesn't sound like a Christian to me.
He won't even provide authentic documentation of his citizenship. The one everyone got to see is a fake.

And for your information, these are not my pre-determined opinions...they are fact. Just read through the hundreds of posts on this forum and find out for youself. Have you read the Constitution? Have you read None Dare Call It Conspiracy? Have you read An Enemy Hath Done This by Ezra Taft Benson? Have you read A Glorious Stand: For All Mankind? And you assume my words are only opinion?

Here, here is a good start: http://www.inspiredconstitution.org/books.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charte ... cript.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

User avatar
George Alabaster
captain of 100
Posts: 237
Location: Oregon

Re: Why Obama cannot be re-elected

Post by George Alabaster »

Allow me to talk you down. I'm not a huge fan of liberalism, but I don't think Obama is all that liberal. At least he is a competent statesman.

He has weakened our defense by cutting back on the military. A socialistic tactic.
OK, so the socialist USSR also had a weak military? Anyway, our military budget is larger than the next 15 nations combined. Our budget is huge and was agreed upon by our generals. Or do you approve of unnecessary spending? Because that affects our deficit, which is also a national security concern.

He has practically bankrupted this country so as to put us into our enemies hands. A socialist tactic.

Which socialist ever used this "tactic"? Anyway, our recession happened under Bush. Since then Obama has been trying to fix it through tax cuts and stimulus. Who jeopardized our credit rating by threatening not to pay our bills? The Republican congress.

He has enacted government run healthcare, against the constitution. A socialist tactic.

The Supreme Court, currently with a conservative majority, ruled that it is constitutional, and they are the final arbiter of these things.

He wants homosexuals to be able to marry without opposition. A socialist tactic.

Not aware that was a socialist issue. But it is an issue of liberty. Or do you hate freedom? Their sins are between them and their God, but our constitutionally secular government should at least be fair about it.

He wants churches to provide contraceptives. A socialist tactic.
No, he wants all women to be able to make their own birth control choices, the churches don't have anything to do with it. I also call that an issue of freedom.

He wants women to be able to kill their unborn babies. A socialist tactic.

I think this one is actually endorsed by socialist countries. But many non-socialists agree, including 74% of American women. That's Democracy. It's also the law of the land. You can't call someone a radical if they agree with present US law. To dictate otherwise would be somewhat totalitarian in my opinion, a common socialist tactic.

He has interfered with free enterprise, with bailouts and loss of jobs. A socialist tactic.
There is no such thing as totally free enterprise. Farm subsidies have existed for decades, subsidies to oil producers likewise continue. Bush proposed the bailouts, and he's not a socialist. So-called free marketeers have been the ones who embraced globalism and shipped our jobs to China and other countries. Wallmart, for example has been responsible for most small business loss in our towns, that's what replaced Main Street.

He has boldly mocked the Bible in front of the nation...and God. Doesn't sound like a Christian to me.
I have no idea what you're talking about. He's not a warmonger and he helps the poor, those sound like Christian principles to me.

He won't even provide authentic documentation of his citizenship. The one everyone got to see is a fake.
False.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/bi ... ficate.asp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Post Reply