Post Reply
Switch to Forum Live View Sequestration + Tax increases = 2.7 Million jobs lost.
2 years ago  ::  Jul 19, 2012 - 6:44PM #1
Bodean
Posts: 9,430
I took GC's number, and added it to the estimated sequestration number.

Obama and his minions are headed to flat our destroy the US economy come Janurary.

2.7 Million jobs are estimated to be lost.

OH well .... that should get him elected for a third term ... just like his mentor .. FDR, who did the same thing.     
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jul 19, 2012 - 7:44PM #2
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,149

Don’t know much about  history. Amendment 22 - Presidential Term Limits. Ratified 2/27/1951. 


1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jul 19, 2012 - 9:42PM #3
Bodean
Posts: 9,430

Jul 19, 2012 -- 7:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Don’t know much about  history. Amendment 22 - Presidential Term Limits. Ratified 2/27/1951. 


1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once





LOL .. well to be so fricken smart .. apparently you missed the historical FACT that FDR served more than 2 terms.


Obama is trying to create the same scenario.  Afterall .. FDR could do that much damage with 3 terms, by keeping the economy in the tank, and creating desperation .. why can't Obama do the same??

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jul 19, 2012 - 11:57PM #4
rangerken
Posts: 16,406

Bodean, the limitation to two terms was passed AFTER FDR's death!


Ken

Libertarian, Conservative, Life member of the NRA and VFW
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jul 20, 2012 - 12:18AM #5
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,149

Jul 19, 2012 -- 9:42PM, Bodean wrote:


Jul 19, 2012 -- 7:44PM, Fodaoson wrote:


Don’t know much about  history. Amendment 22 - Presidential Term Limits. Ratified 2/27/1951. 


1. No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once





LOL .. well to be so fricken smart .. apparently you missed the historical FACT that FDR served more than 2 terms.


Obama is trying to create the same scenario.  Afterall .. FDR could do that much damage with 3 terms, by keeping the economy in the tank, and creating desperation .. why can't Obama do the same??




Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882-1945) 32nd President of the U.S. 1933-1945


22nd Amendment to U.S. Constitution Ratified 2/27/1951


Barack Hussein Obama (1961- )   44th  U.S, President  2009-


            Maybe one should not be so quick to call another “fricken smart”.  The evidence  presented indicates  the accuser’s ignorance.  


 


 

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jul 20, 2012 - 9:01AM #6
Bodean
Posts: 9,430

Jul 19, 2012 -- 11:57PM, rangerken wrote:


Bodean, the limitation to two terms was passed AFTER FDR's death!


Ken





Never fear Ken ... the "norm" was two terms before FDR ... the Democrats ignored the norm.  The 22nd Amendment is now law, but when has that stopped anybody??  Obama has just repealed the Welfare Reform law, even though that authority is not granted in the law.  Obama just passed a mandate that people buy something ... even though that is unconstitutional, regardless of what Roberts thinks.


Harry Reid, and three other Democrats have proposed legislation to repeal the 22nd amendment on 4 separate occassions.  This tells you the desire of the Dictatorial Democrats.  Given their tendency to ignore the law, you can bet that there will be a loop-hole found in the Constitution that will allow them to circumvent the 22nd.


As noted by Laslett ...


"On the other hand, the philosophical tradition behind the idea of government by  consent and by law has acknowledged that republican executives must have power  to act in an emergency. In his Discourses on the First Ten Books of Titus  Livius, Machiavelli wrote, “Those republics which in time of danger cannot  resort to a dictatorship will generally be ruined when grave occasions occur” (book 1, chap. 34). In The Second Treatise of Government (1690), John  Locke noted that, because it is “impossible to foresee, and so by laws to  provide for, all accidents and necessities, … therefore there is a latitude left  to the executive power, to do many things … which the laws do not prescribe.” This power Locke called “prerogative”; it is the power “to act according to  discretion, for the public good, without the prescription of the law, and  sometimes even against it” (Laslett, ed., 1988, p. 375).34 "


Just as FDR created a catastrophy for the US Public, taking the US from a recession to a long standing depression, in order to usher in all kinds of Eurpean Ideas grounded in Social Justice, there is absolutely nothing in law to stop President Obama from doing the same.  Indeed, the action of the President are consistent with notion that he is actually trying to bring about such a catastrophy, to create a scenario wherein "Hope and Change" can be ushered in, implementing all kinds of ideological law.


At the very least, given the stupidity and gullibility of the US Public, such a catastrophy can be used to bring about the necessary support to repeal the 22nd Amendemnt, as Harry Reid and other Democrats have sought to do.


You are free to "trust" the Democrats ... I do not.  They have a long track record of deception and dishonesty.  While the GOP is accused of its cozy relations with business .. the Democrats are bent on changing the LAW in a way that guarantees their philosophy be written for the land in the code.


I'll be here to tell you "I told you so" when it all goes down.

Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jul 20, 2012 - 9:23AM #7
amcolph
Posts: 17,386

Jul 20, 2012 -- 9:01AM, Bodean wrote:

"


Just as FDR created a catastrophy for the US Public, taking the US from a recession to a long standing depression, in order to usher in all kinds of Eurpean Ideas grounded in Social Justice...





So FDR intentionally extended the depression for that nefarious purpose?


But you seem very much against Social Justice.  The modern concept of social justice stems from the work of philosophers like John Rawls, who gives us these as its components.:

  • Freedom of thought;
  • Liberty of conscience as it affects social relationships on the grounds of religion, philosophy, and morality;
  • Political liberties (e.g. representative democratic institutions, freedom of speech and the press, and freedom of assembly);
  • Freedom of association;
  • Freedoms necessary for the liberty and integrity of the person (viz: freedom from slavery, freedom of movement and a reasonable degree of freedom to choose one's occupation); and
  • Rights and liberties covered by the rule of law.

Specifically, which of these do you oppose?


 

This post contains no advertisements or solicitations.
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jul 20, 2012 - 9:46AM #8
Fodaoson
Posts: 11,149

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon


  I am going to deviate from one of my rules, stated above .   In past post you predict a huge landslide loo by Obama and now predicting h multiple reelection requiring a change in the constitution, not just an act of congress law.   


You show an ignorance of  history and the when called out, come up some  rambling “I’m  not guilty”.


If Obama is so disliked he cannot get reelected how is he going to get congress, both houses, and the 38 states to approve a constitutional change?  Not higher order thinking.


The Great depression began with recession  in September 1929 and the depression  with the stock market collapse in October 1929.  The depression was world wide.  Unemployment  reached 33% The drought that began in 1930s aggravated the economic situation. The combined depression/ Dust bowl  brought about the largest internal migration in American history.   FDR became President in 1932 ; the recession was three years old and the depression two. The Worldwide depression caused upheaval worldwide, and brought the Nazi to power in Germany that led to WWII.  FDR republican opponents offered nothing but let it be; FDR conceived programs that helped.  With a war on the horizon in 1938 The Republican party was isolationists and FDR was preparing for war. 


Where you and conservative /republicans see FDR As “a Liberal” the  people living at the time saw him as a President helping a desperate nation.


The situation of today is vastly different from the 1930s, and your predications are incongruent.


 That being said “I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon   is back in place 

“I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon
Quick Reply
Cancel
2 years ago  ::  Jul 20, 2012 - 10:05AM #9
Bodean
Posts: 9,430

Jul 20, 2012 -- 9:46AM, Fodaoson wrote:


 


 That being said “I seldom make the mistake of arguing with people for whose opinions I have no respect.” Edward Gibbon   is back in place 




I would suggest you stick with your rule from the beginning.


You have no respect for my opinion ... I have no respect for the philosophy you embrace, or the people who ascribe to it.


As far as I'm concerned ... "we're good".


But I wll say this ... before every dictatorship ... something else existed.  Don't think it can't happen here ... and don't think the Democrats are above it.  BUT ... you actually may support it, so it is a moot point.

Quick Reply
Cancel
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook