@Diest TKO,
Quote:
You need to stop watching Mad Max before going to bed.
That was ghastly,
repellent entertainment, from its first minute.
@Miller,
Quote:
Based on the composition of Obama's"inner circle", it looks like the general public is about to get a major introduction to dirty Chicago politics.
David, you're right to be concerned. Only a fool would be otherwise.
Yes.
His cabinet will be a nightmare,
or shoud we say "
the worker' paradise " ?
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
I suppose that this a poor reaction of those, who didn't want to see that the great majority of Americans wanted a change.
Or of those, who are unaware of how democracy works (via elections).
But I really expected such - more than "a new civic war after Obama lost".
Yes, a great majority of 52%.
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
Quote:
Thank you for being a "real American" and supporting your president
elected by more than 50% of your fellow citizens.
R u implying that I have a
DUTY to do this ?
If so, what is
the source of this duty ?
The source of the duty is the Constution. Those who love the Constitution must obey it both when pleasant and unpleasant. The Constitution provides for periodic elections and the orderly transfer of power. Many elections have been won by unsavory methods, but, except for the case of pervasive fraud, which I don't think occurred, that doesn't release us from our duty to follow the system which the Founders put here for us.
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
Thank you for being a "real American" and supporting your president
elected by more than 50% of your fellow citizens.
Quote:R u implying that I have a DUTY to do this ?
If so, what is the source of this duty ?
Quote:
The source of the duty is the Constution.
OK: u
SHOW ME where it says in the Constitution
that I have a duty to support him (or anyone).
Please quote the language.
I wanna see
THIS.
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
Quote:
Thank you for being a "real American" and supporting your president
elected by more than 50% of your fellow citizens.
Quote:R u implying that I have a DUTY to do this ?
If so, what is the source of this duty ?
Quote:
The source of the duty is the Constution.
OK: u
SHOW ME where it says in the Constitution
that I have a duty to support him (or anyone).
Please quote the language.
I wanna see
THIS.
You don't have a duty to support his policies, and I don't support many of them. We have a duty to regard the process which put him there as valid, because he was elected in accordance with our Constitution.
Loyal Americans, in my opinion, also have a duty to try to support the country's leader, as much as they are able, just because he is the country's validly selected leader. We have a duty to be the "loyal opposition," not the "disloyal opposition." During President Bush's terms of office, many liberals and Democrats made it crystal clear that they had no respect for the election process and were often utterly disloyal, but we we ought to adhere to a higher standard. We should keep the good of the country in mind and not just the good of our side. Obama's been elected in a fair contest. Get used to it.
@OmSigDAVID,
Inhale, David. Take a nice deep calming breath.
John McCain
Quote:Senator Obama and I have had and argued our differences, and he has prevailed. No doubt many of those differences remain.
These are difficult times for our country. And I pledge to him tonight to do all in my power to help him lead us through the many challenges we face.
I urge all Americans ... I urge all Americans who supported me to join me in not just congratulating him, but offering our next president our good will and earnest effort to find ways to come together to find the necessary compromises to bridge our differences and help restore our prosperity, defend our security in a dangerous world, and leave our children and grandchildren a stronger, better country than we inherited.
Whatever our differences, we are fellow Americans. And please believe me when I say no association has ever meant more to me than that.
It is natural. It's natural, tonight, to feel some disappointment. But tomorrow, we must move beyond it and work together to get our country moving again.
Inhale, and focus.
transcription
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
You don't have a duty to support his policies,
and I don't support many of them. We have a duty to regard
the process which put him there as valid,
because he was elected in accordance with our Constitution.
I have read the Constitution 1ce or 2ice and I did not find any
"
duty to regard"; will u be kind enuf to
quote
the applicable language ?
Quote:
Loyal Americans, in my opinion, also have a duty to try to support the country's leader
Well, if u tell us that it is your opinion,
then I will take your word that it actually
is your opinion,
but that is not the same as the Constitution,
which u have alleged to be the source of my
"DUTY" to support Oboy.
I remain constitutionally
SKEPTICAL.
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:
Quote:
You don't have a duty to support his policies,
and I don't support many of them. We have a duty to regard
the process which put him there as valid,
because he was elected in accordance with our Constitution.
I have read the Constitution 1ce or 2ice and I did not find any
"
duty to regard"; will u be kind enuf to
quote
the applicable language ?
Quote:
Loyal Americans, in my opinion, also have a duty to try to support the country's leader
Well, if u tell us that it is your opinion,
then I will take your word that it actually
is your opinion,
but that is not the same as the Constitution,
which u have alleged to be the source of my
"DUTY" to support Oboy.
I remain constitutionally
SKEPTICAL.
The Constitution doesn't say that you have a duty to respect the procedures in the Constitution, but I love the document, and regard it as one of the greatest political documents to come out of the Age of Enlightenment, so I'll respect it's workings, including elections.
@Brandon9000,
I love it
TOO,
and we are going to see it get raped
by who u have claimed that I have a "duty" to support.
No one has a duty to support the President.
We all, on the other hand, have a duty to support our nation which is our society, and our community.
To the extent our opposition to the President degrades our support of our nation, it needs to be reigned in.
Having said this, it is entirely possible that a vigorous and even extreme opposition to the President is in keeping with support of the nation.
However, it is far too soon to suggest that this is the case with an Obama presidency.
Extreme opponents of Bush, in my opinion, were unjustified, and ill served their nation. Obviously they believe otherwise, but at least they have had eight years of governance upon which to base their opinion.
It is not inconceivable that Obama will be a President who deserves our most extreme opposition, but it is silly to reach this conclusion days after he has won the election.
If conservatives' worst fears are realized in an Obama presidency, then I have absolute faith in my fellow Americans to apply the brakes of public opinion and install a Republican counter-balance in congress in 2010.
If Obama, incredibly, proves to be a would-be tyrant, I also have absolute faith in my fellow Americans and our institutions to throw him out on his ass.
There are reasons to fear an Obama presidency.
A repeat of the Carter presidency would be horrible.
But rational people, and patriotic Americans, will reserve judgment, at least, until he starts wielding the power of the presidency and demonstrates his intentions.
When he does, we will be serving our nation if we we do not reflexively view them in either an absolute ideological light, or some ignorant, mean-spirited tribalist view.
Conservatives who have been repulsed by the Left's demonization of George W Bush should take care not to respond in kind to Obama.
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
No one has a duty to support the President....Conservatives who have been repulsed by the Left's demonization of George W Bush should take care not to respond in kind to Obama.
Certainly, as you say, a president could commit abuses so serious and/or pervasive that he would forfeit the right of cooperation. Disagreeing with him politically certainly wouldn't rise to that level. In general, the remedy for a president one doesn't agree with is the next election. Usually, the wellbeing of the country depends on working together, even when there is serious disagreement. The demonization of George Bush showed disrespect for the election process and the greater good. I opposed doing that to president Clinton, even though I disagreed with him politically, and I won't participate in doing it to president Obama.
@Phoenix32890,
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Hopefully, the people around him will help him to become more centrist.
I wonder if his program(s) would work ... or still be there, if he becomes "more centrist". (From a European view, he's just saying what our conservatives do here.)
@Phoenix32890,
Phoenix32890 wrote:
One thing that I have to say. I watched Obama's press conference yesterday, and must admit that I was impressed. Although I do not agree with his politics, I believe that he is the most intelligent politician to come across the pike in many a moon.
Hopefully, the people around him will help him to become more centrist. If he, as he says, wants to "reach across the aisle" he needs to remember that the US population is made up of more than extreme left wingers.
Being intelligent is good, but, by itself, it's not enough. This whole idea of robbing from the rich to give to the middle class is disturbing, simply because robbery is always wrong. Also, today a president must have a realistic attitude about the dangers we face. However, he is the legitimately elected leader, so I'll wait and see what happens.
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
One thing that I have to say. I watched Obama's press conference yesterday, and must admit that I was impressed. Although I do not agree with his politics, I believe that he is the most intelligent politician to come across the pike in many a moon.
Hopefully, the people around him will help him to become more centrist. If he, as he says, wants to "reach across the aisle" he needs to remember that the US population is made up of more than extreme left wingers.
Being intelligent is good, but, by itself, it's not enough. This whole idea of robbing from the rich to give to the middle class is disturbing, simply because robbery is always wrong. Also, today a president must have a realistic attitude about the dangers we face. However, he is the legitimately elected leader, so I'll wait and see what happens.
Raising the top tax brackets is not 'robbing from the rich.' All citizens who earn money have a specific duty to pay taxes; it's not robbery. The levels at which those tax rates are set is a matter of policy; it's not robbery for Obama to raise those levels on the rich, at a time when our Government is heavily in debt. You use your terms carelessly.
Cycloptichorn
@Phoenix32890,
Quote:The anger, the vitriol that I am observing, IMO, is more than repugnant.
How dare you talk about me like that!
