Is Obama Really Satan?, Or just the Anitchrist?

stevenpd - I don't think anyone can dispute that Obama failed to place his hand over his heart during the national anthem once. There are photographs showing it. There are also photos showing him placing his hand over it on other occasions. The initial comment said he "refuses" to put his hand over his heart, as though it were an intentional snub. I can't find any comment by him which definitively proves any such intent. Remember, this was a reason given to assert some impending totalitarianism. So tell me what's the formula? How many neglected hands over hearts equals how much totalitarianism?

Lets take the Muslim comment in context shall we:

“What I want to do is to create a better dialogue so that the Muslim world understands more effectively how the United States, but also how the West thinks about many of these difficult issues like terrorism, like democracy, to discuss the framework for what’s happened in Iraq and Afghanistan and our outreach to Iran, and also how we view the prospects for peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians,” Mr. Obama said.

The president said the United States and other parts of the Western world “have to educate ourselves more effectively on Islam.”

“And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world,” Mr. Obama said. “And so there’s got to be a better dialogue and a better understanding between the two peoples.”

He's quantifying the relative size of Muslim populations in the US and in predominately Muslim countries. That's an entirely different statement than saying the US is a Muslim nation. Why? Because its not a solely Muslim nation or even predominately one. Come now, lets give the guy some credit for an IQ and take comments within the context they're made without superimpositions of fictionalized nefarious intent.

I agree with your point that people should be heard in the health care debate and the facts of the bill should be revealed to them as it progresses rather than foisted upon them without regard for their opinions, particularly if manditory participation is part of the bill. Yet in fairness, how many of you really avidly peruse the congressional record and keep track of pending legislation? Are not avenues available to write/contact your representatives about any issue in their legislative purview? Haven't there always been?

The cybersecurity bill sounds scary yes. But when you consider how vast is the reach of internet, our dependence on it and how far reaching and disabling an attack would be in the realms of finanace, defense, communication and utility infrastructures, which would probably be considered "critical networks", then what is the government to do in an extreme circumstance? Before anyone says "create better security against attacks, with defensive software" I would think that's part of the mix wouldn't you? I wouldn't mind such a post being established - providing it has sufficient congressional and judicial oversight! Give me an alternative. What defensive means would you establish to defend against an attack which would effectively disable aspects of the internet critical to national defense, banking, telecommunications etc.? Wouldn't you want the ability to shut down those networks as an option? If you're worried about such activity being at the sole discretion of the president, remember the decision to launch nuclear weapons is in his discretion? Establishment of martial law..... What - You want assurances that you'd have the ability to email your loved ones once the missles fly?

How much do you trust your government? This seems to be the central question for all of us. By the way, "not at all" is a disingenuous answer. There are countless ways government is trusted in every facet of life by all of us. I have no argument against oversight, no argument with the people's constitutional right to address or protest government policies should they have a greivance and agree that govenment has an obligation to respond, but lets get real. Egregious totalitarian panic attacks and hyperbole serve as distractions from maintaining these rights effectively. With due respect to the emotions involved, at some point intelligent discussion has to commence. That said, I recognize the potential that town hall shouting matches may serve as prelude to greater discussion, if for no other reason than to stop them, then again they may only create backlash.

The level of distrust is climbing toward 80% and to get there D's must share the distrust.

Slàinte,    

Patch    

One more thing about health care. According to ABC news, the deficit is now a record $1.27 trillion. It would be smart to postpone the entire legislation for financial reasons alone. That would make everyone happy (except Obama) temporarily. In the meantime, it would give Congress time to really hash out a workable plan, and respond to the people's concerns.

Because we are diverting the discussion from the original post I have started another topic to continue.

Town Hall link

Ok then, Princess Brainy Britches, how's about you educate all us po little idgets what the word atrocity means so's we can uses it in the prp, er, um, coorec, uh, um, right way. How's about that?

Robert McGrady, Through the Bottom of my Beer Glass

Can you say "Princess Brainy Britches" ten times fast in a row without saying the word you really mean?

Nope, can't do it. I tried, but I didn't even make it once.

I didn't think you could.
Perfectly normal, though. You are no more in control of your sub-aware mental processing than anyone else, although you are unusually generous in letting it hang out on display.

Sub-aware, schmub-aware. When you pound on someone long enough, they draw their conclusions. But I never took you as someone who was trying to be liked.

If you don't want to be analyzed, don't be hanging your id-bits out on the line to dry. As to name calling and similar crassitudes: I have been called a bitch and an angel in the same five minutes in my life -- not by the same person of course -- and I'm well used to both.

And if you call that a pounding, you may be in need of a little toughening. Start by reading your own posts into a mirror for thirty seconds every morning.

Stoirmeil -

I'll try that and get back with you.

SCShamrock;

I've been reading these post about Obama and Satan and The Anti-Christ and I have a question.

CAN YOU YANKS DO ANYTHING WITHOUT DRAGGING YOUR SO CALLED "GOD" INTO IT? In some respects you are as bad as the Muslims. Inshalah, God Wills it. If you really believe in this the 21st Century that Satan and the Anti-Christ exist then I suggest you are stuck in a time warp somewhere between the 10th and 17th Centuries. Obama is a man that's all and his chances of being Satan or the Anti-Christ are the same as me being the re-incarnation of Buddah.



Camac.

I doubt you read it all if you think I seriously believe Obama is the antichrist.

SCShamrock;

Whether you believe Obama is Satan or the Anti-Christ is not the point. The point is that the person who dug through his dog-eared highlighted copy of the bible searching for obscure quotes to conform to his ideology and then posting it on U-Tube is not alone. As an outsider looking in I some times get the impression that individuals like him form a very great part of your society which seems to be unable to wipe their backsides without envoking god. God is not an American Citizen though I am sure a great many Americans believe so.

Now, I realize that your posting was done in a scarcastic vein but it seems that some of the comments are getting a tad nasty and tempers are getting ragged. Decorum please alway Decorum. Any way what do I know, I'm just a dumbass Canuck whose brain got frostbit.



Camac

We tolerate most anything here under the first amendment, at least for now. Until they cross the line and commit an illegal act, they say whatever they believe.

We had a young man here who traveled to various county fairs and festivals handing out pamphlets explaining that if one ate human brains you would gain in intelligence and have immortality. That was legal. However after a year his uncle died and a viewing was held at a small town just south of me. During the lunch time when no one was there he came in with a bowling bag and small tree pruning saw. When they found what he had done the police immediately went to his house and retrieved him, the head, bowling bag and saw. Then he had crossed the line! He is and will remain in a mental facility for the rest of his life.

For several years there were jokes about it going around.

The only person who can not be threatened in the area where I live is the president. For all others, no law is broken till someone ACTS on the threat. Some states could be a little different.

Slàinte,    

Patch    

Camac -

Thanks for making me laugh. There are many of us here who are as befuddled by this tendency as you are, and we're looking at it from the inside.