Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 09:52 am
@okie,
Quote:
If anything, it seems to enforce or further legitimize the fears that we conservatives have about Obama. How about you?


Some dude in China makes a Tshirt with a picture of Obama as a Socialist soldier, and it legitimizes the fears that you have about him?

I will say, it's about as legitimate evidence as the vast majority of other stuff you say about him. Which is not to say that any serious person would consider what you wrote to be rational.

Cycloptichorn
okie
 
  0  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 10:26 am
@Cycloptichorn,
It shows, cyclops, that it isn't merely conservatives drumming up fears about Obama. Others in the world also make judgements about Obama. After all, these ideas about Obama do not arise out of nothing. Obama has a history of questionable associations, plus he has not dispelled this history during his administration, as he has appointed or attempted to appoint a number of Marxist sympathizers. You can choose to believe it means nothing, but I do not. I suspect the difference between us is the fact that you even admit that there are aspects of Marxism that you like as well, so perhaps you share many of Obama's views.

All of this is interesting, because I read again last night as carefully as I could the article written by George Soros published in the Atlantic Monthly in 1997, titled "The Capitalist Threat." I also read again the article in Wiki about "Open Society," which Soros refers to repeatedly in his article. It is fascinating reading because Soros ideas seem to also largely agree with what I perceive you to believe, as well as what Obama believes. We also know don't we that Soros apparently picked Obama as his guy to lead the Democratic Party to bigger and better things as Soros envisions.

As a conclusion to this post, I will quote just one statement made by Soros in his article, which I think tells us much about what Soros, the Democrats, and perhaps Obama, what they think about world politics and U.S. politics. My take on what Obama does and says seems to be consistent with that anyway. I would recommend everyone read the Soros article.
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/97feb/capital/capital.htm
"The main enemy of the open society, I believe, is no longer the communist but the capitalist threat." The above quote pretty much harmonizes with everything else that Soros wrote in his article in the Atlantic Monthly. Remember, Soros is the guy that said he paid for the Democratic Party and so he owns it, some such words as that anyway.
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 10:28 am
@okie,
Quote:
We also know don't we that Soros apparently picked Obama as his guy to lead the Democratic Party to bigger and better things as Soros envisions.


Uh, I can assure you that 'we' don't know anything of the sort. And how you transitioned this to George Soros, I'll never know, b/c that has nothing at all to do with the current discussion.

Just your usual MO - innuendo and smears, associations and suspicions on your part, but no proof or concrete actions of anything. The truth is that whatever someone puts on a Tshirt in China means absolutely nothing at all about Obama or anything having to do with him - but since it conveniently allows you to launch into your 'Obama is a Socialist' screed, you'll grab onto it with both hands.

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 10:29 am
@okie,
As I recall there was the biggest world-wide demonstration against GW Bush's war against Iraq, but he didn't listen.
0 Replies
 
ican711nm
 
  -3  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 10:31 am
@plainoldme,
plainoldme wrote:
ican: When are you going to catch on that no one gives a tinker's damn for Saul Alinsky?


Perhaps "no one gives a tinker's damn for Saul Alinsky." When are you going to catch on that all Leftist Liberals give far more than a tinker's damn for what Saul Alinski said and wrote. How do I know. I judge people by their actions. Leftist Liberals--Obama and Soros in particular--act in strict accord with what Saul Alinsky said and wrote.
Quote:
Saul Alinsky said and wrote:
->The radical is not a reformer of the system but its would-be destroyer;
->The revolutionary’s purpose is to undermine the system;
->The radical is building his own kingdom, a kingdom of heaven on earth;
->The radical underrmines the system by taking from the haves and giving it to the have nots;
->The most basic principle for radicals is lie to opponents
;
->The issue is never the issue;
->The issue is always the revolution;
->The radical organizer does not have a fixed truth—truth to him is relative and changing;
->The stated cause is never the real cause, but only an occasion to advance the real cause;
->The real cause is the accumulation of power to make the revolution.
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 10:41 am
Quote:
From George Soros and his associates.

GEORGE SOROS in his 1995 book, page 145, [I]Soros on Soros[/I], wrote:
I do not accept the rules imposed by others. If I did, I would not be alive today. I am a law-abiding citizen, but I recognize that there are regimes that need to be opposed rather than accepted. And in periods of regime change, the normal rules don't apply. One needs to adjust one's behavior to the changing circumstances.


Bruck, in The World According to Soros, page 58, wrote:
Tividar [George Soros's father] saved his family by splitting them up, providing them with forged papers and false identities as Christians, and bribing Gentile families to take them in. George Soros took the name Sandor Kiss, and posed as the godson of a man named Baumbach, an official of Hungary's fascist regime. Baumbach was assigned to deliver deportation notices to Jews and confiscate Jewish property. [Baumbach] brought young Soros with him on his rounds.


Michael Kaufman in his biography of George Soros, page 293, [I]Soros [/I], wrote:
My goal is to become the conscience of the world


GEORGE SOROS in his 2000 book, page 337, [I]Open Society[/I], wrote:
Usually it takes a crisis to prompt a meaningful change in direction.


GEORGE SOROS in the Washington Post, page A03 of November 11, 2003, wrote:
Ousting Bush from the White House is the central focus of my life. It's a matter of life and death.


GEORGE SOROS in the 2003 edition of his book, page 15, [I]The Alchemy of Finance[/I], wrote:
My greatest fear is that the Bush Doctrine will succeed--that Bush will crush the terrorists, tame the rogue states of the axis of evil, and usher in a golden age of American supremacy. American supremacy is flawed and bound to fail in the long run.

What I am afraid of is that the pursuit of American supremacy may be successful for a while because the United States in fact employs a dominant position in the world today.


GEORGE SOROS on June 10, 2004 to the Associated Press, wrote:

These are not normal times.


GEORGE SOROS in his 2004 book, page 159, [I]The Bubble of American Supremacy[/I], wrote:
The principles of the Declaration of Independence are not self-evident truths but arrangements necessitated by our inherently imperfect understanding.


Quote:
In April 2005 the Soros funded Campus Progress web site posted this headline: "An Invitation to Help Design the Constitution in 2020" (This was an invitation to a Yale law School Conference on "The Constitution of 2020: a progressive vision of what the Constitution ought to be.")


Sam Hananel in his associated Press article, December 10, 2004, wrote:
On December 9, 2004, Eli Pariser, who headed Soros's group Moveon PAC, boasted to his members, "Now the Democratic Party is our party. We bought it, we own it."


Quote:
Soros … pushed for the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 which was intended to ban "soft money" contributions to federal election campaigns. Soros has responded that his donations to unaffiliated organizations do not raise the same corruption issues as donations directly to the candidates or political parties.


Quote:
Soros gave $3 million to the Center for American Progress, committed $5 million to MoveOn, while he and his friend Peter Lewis each gave America Coming Together $10 million. (All were groups that worked to support Democrats in the 2004 election.) On September 28, 2004 he dedicated more money to the campaign and kicked off his own multi-state tour with a speech: Why We Must Not Re-elect President Bush[19] delivered at the National Press Club in Washington, DC.

okie
 
  1  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 10:44 am
@Cycloptichorn,
Cycloptichorn wrote:

Quote:
We also know don't we that Soros apparently picked Obama as his guy to lead the Democratic Party to bigger and better things as Soros envisions.


Uh, I can assure you that 'we' don't know anything of the sort. And how you transitioned this to George Soros, I'll never know, b/c that has nothing at all to do with the current discussion.Cycloptichorn

I will agree that I don't know that. I have read that as an opinion, and I have the distinct impression that Obama had significant powers behind his run, not only money but the press. The press trumped up Obama as if he was virtually the second coming, and so to this day I have wondered who in position of money and power was behind it? After all, how many times have we had a novice Senator, a community activist, such as Obama, ever arise almost out of nothing politically? I agree Obama ran an efficient campaign, but I am not so naive as to believe he could have done it without special help from the press and people of money and power in the background, and Soros is really a mover and shaker behind the scenes and intimately tied to the Democratic Party agenda. After all, how many organizations is Soros behind? Just a few that I can name include:
America Coming Together , America Votes, Center for American Progress
Media Fund, and MoveOn.org .

So cyclops, you can call my posts innuendo and smears, but it is all fact based.
ican711nm
 
  -2  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 10:44 am
PRESIDENT BARACH OBAMA HAS UNLAWFULLY:
Quote:

http://www.altavista.com/web/results?fr=altavista&itag=ody&q=REASONS+FOR+IMPEACHING+BARACK+OBAMA+&kgs=0&kls=0
http://www.amorian.org/2009/09/06/the-big-list-of-reasons-to-impeach-barack-obama/

(1) taken private property from those persons and from those organizations who have lawfully earned it, and given it to those persons and organizations who have not lawfully earned it.

(2) exercised the authority of his office to take private property for public use in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution, which guarantees to the People that “private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation,” and without “due process of law.”

(3) interfered with the management of private companies for the purpose of achieving government control of them, in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution.

(4) interfered with the economic rights of the people by imposing unreasonable impairments in the fulfillment of their intended contractual obligations, and their ability to enter into such contracts.

(5) attempted to change our fundamental economic system from one governed by the rule of law to one governed by presidential dictate.

(6) signed an unconstitutional health care bill that is not authorized by any power of Congress enumerated in the Constitution, not even by a very expansive reading of the power to regulate commerce among the several states.

(7) signed an unconstitutional health care bill that violates the Tenth Amendment by requiring state governments to force their citizens to purchase medical insurance they do not want to purchase.

(8) signed an unconstitutional health care bill that violates the Ninth Amendment by forcing state governments to force their citizens to be denied rights that are retained by the people.

(9) used public money to purchase private companies.

(10) given our public money to a foreign state to finance their state-run oil company while refusing to allow us to develop our own oil resources.

(11) violated the balance of powers among the Congress, the Judiciary, and the Presidency by appointing, without congressional approval, so called Czars with far reaching powers who are accountable to no one but himself.

(12) funded his election campaign with foreign contributions.

(13) permitted the justice department to implement a policy to not prosecute any civil rights or voting rights violations if perpetrated by a black or blacks against a white or whites.

0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 10:46 am
@okie,
When have you ever posted evidence that stood up to scrutiny? Zero.
okie
 
  0  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 11:03 am
@cicerone imposter,
ci, you make alot of noise, but why don't you actually post some information of interest? For example, if you disagree with the information I posted, then provide evidence for it along with your disagreement. For example, I posted information about Soros and what he wrote, all factual, and the organizations he has promoted, all again factual. Your claim then that my posts are without evidence is frankly nonsense.

You can take my suggestion, or you can go back to your pattern of throwing out unfounded and unwarranted insults.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 11:04 am
@okie,
You can post all the quotes from Soros, but he is not the democratic party. CLUE: No one person represents any party. That is just simple logic; not rocket science.
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 11:09 am
@ican711nm,
GWB got a shoe.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 11:12 am
@okie,
Quote:
For example, I posted information about Soros and what he wrote, all factual, and the organizations he has promoted, all again factual. Your claim then that my posts are without evidence is frankly nonsense.


But, nobody is contesting what you wrote about Soros; only that it has nothing to do with the price of Tea in China. He is no different than the rich guys who have funded the Right Wing for a long time, such as Melon-Scaife or the Koch brothers. Yet, I never see you owning up to the fact that these guys own and set the agenda for YOUR party; so there's a logical inconsistency here.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  2  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 12:19 pm
@okie,
Quote:
That is the way I take it,


No ****, Okie. I'd never have figured that unless you told me.

You and Ican operate on a set of red neck principles, formulated in the back of the local feed store chawin' things over with the other equally ignorant rednecks. You have a child's understanding of political science, a red neck's understanding of pretty much everything else.

You think that because you can read all the words in the constitution, you have some grasp of their meaning or history. You think that because you can read what others wrote, with the aid of a dictionary, you have a firm grasp on the overall meaning.

Both you and Ican have shown that in spades. As I've said a number of times, you don't have the brains or anywhere NEAR the degree of fairness to meaningfully comment on most of what you comment on.
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 12:24 pm
@JTT,
But...but...I'm a redneck! From the mountains of Virginia.
I am deeply insulted.
I demand an apology.
JTT
 
  1  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 12:35 pm
@realjohnboy,
So am I, but I've never let it control how my brain functions. I see that you haven't either, RJB.
0 Replies
 
JPB
 
  1  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 12:46 pm
@realjohnboy,
Me too.

Most of my family would think Okie was speaking for them.

We all get along fairly well, but we don't discuss politics. Wink
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 12:47 pm
@JPB,
okie is the authority for all conservatives; didn't you know.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 12:52 pm
@okie,
Quote:
I frankly find it somewhat repulsive to see an American president portrayed in that manner, so I don't view that stuff being common in China as being any kind of a compliment for the president at all. If anything, it seems to enforce or further legitimize the fears that we conservatives have about Obama. How about you?

Does this mean you think the Chinese "love" America but just not as much as you do?
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Mon 13 Sep, 2010 12:57 pm
@parados,
We all know where okie's brains resides when he makes it a big deal about a t-shirt made in China about Obama.

Would 3rd grade be too high?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1783
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.2 seconds on 07/15/2025 at 01:24:35