>As long as the law is obeyed and ALL parties rights respected NO >ONE is >acting in an Anti-AMERICAN manner.
Don't be a fuckin boob. Our first amendment ALLOWS people to be anti- American LEGALLY. Get a grip, Mr. Minutia, On Oct 23, 6:29 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > frankg, > > My point should be obvious. One can diisagree with what the President > is doing as vocally as one wishes, one can also approve and support > the president as vocally as one wishes. As long as the law is obeyed > and ALL parties rights respected NO ONE is acting in an Anti-AMERICAN > manner. > All this "Anti-American" talk is complete bullshit. > > On Oct 23, 4:09 pm, frankg <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Actually Hollywood, what you’re doing is citing some of the benefits > > of being an American. That you take advantage of those benefits does > > not prove you’re not anti-American. > > > On Oct 23, 3:37 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Zeb, > > > > Sorry you don't believe in freedom, or the 1st Ammendmendment to the > > > Constituion. Not my problem. > > > > On Oct 23, 1:44 pm, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Rather simplistic and really not helpful where this thread is > > > > concerned. > > > > > On Oct 23, 12:45 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Zeb, > > > > > > To be American is to have the absolute RIGHT to think differently, > > > > > believe differently, act differently so long as you obey the law and > > > > > respect the rights of others while doing so. > > > > > > On Oct 23, 11:27 am, Zebnick <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > There is no text book definition of "what is an American." However, > > > > > > for most people it means what they perceive America and Americans to > > > > > > be, in general. The reason many people believe Obama to be "anti- > > > > > > American" is because he doesn't like what many people believe > > > > > > America > > > > > > to be. His wife doesn't either. They resent many of the > > > > > > institutions, > > > > > > associations and policies, both domestic and international, that > > > > > > define this country for many people. It is not hard to understand > > > > > > where this derision comes from when you examine Barack and > > > > > > Michelle's > > > > > > associates and their philosophies over the years. > > > > > > > On Oct 22, 5:33 pm, Sage2 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > It could be Obama is not nti-American!? He is > > > > > > > however > > > > > > > pro-socialist which makes him anti-American. > > > > > > > > ************************************************************************************************************************* > > > > > > > > On Oct 21, 4:49 pm, Travis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > « Obama and Ahmadinejad — the Love > > > > > > > > Song<http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/10/18/obama-and-ahmadinehad-the-love...> > > > > > > > > > The gay agenda > > > > > > > > <http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/10/18/the-gay-agenda/> » > > > > > > > > > Is Barack Obama anti-American? > > > > > > > > *UPDATED*<http://www.bookwormroom.com/2009/10/18/is-barack-obama-anti-american/> > > > > > > > > > Bookworm <http://www.bookwormroom.com/author/bookworm/> on Oct > > > > > > > > 18 2009 at > > > > > > > > 12:48 pm | Filed under: > > > > > > > > Anti-Americanism<http://www.bookwormroom.com/category/anti-americanism/>, > > > > > > > > Barack Obama > > > > > > > > <http://www.bookwormroom.com/category/barack-obama/>, > > > > > > > > Freedom<http://www.bookwormroom.com/category/freedom/> > > > > > > > > > 23 <http://tweetmeme.com/story/219069223/> > > > > > > > > > tweets <http://tweetmeme.com/story/219069223/> > > > > > > > > > retweet > > > > > > > > > A couple of weeks ago, I included in a post the statement that > > > > > > > > Barack Obama > > > > > > > > is anti-American. A dear and respected friend suggested that I > > > > > > > > was > > > > > > > > exaggerating. Obama may have a different vision of or goal for > > > > > > > > America, he > > > > > > > > said, but that’s scarcely the same as being anti-American. > > > > > > > > I’ve been > > > > > > > > thinking that over for a while and, after a lot of mental give > > > > > > > > and take > > > > > > > > about what it means to be “anti-” anything, have now decided > > > > > > > > that Barack > > > > > > > > Obama is indeed anti-American. > > > > > > > > > Everything has a fundamental essence, a quality that makes it > > > > > > > > uniquely > > > > > > > > itself. Take an orange, for example. It’s not only citrus > > > > > > > > fruit, *it’s an > > > > > > > > orange colored *citrus fruit. Horticulturists can alter its > > > > > > > > size, its > > > > > > > > texture, it’s sweetness, and the purity of its orange color, > > > > > > > > but it still > > > > > > > > remains an orange because that color is its definition. Change > > > > > > > > the color, > > > > > > > > however, and suddenly, you have the un-orange, the anti-orange. > > > > > > > > You have > > > > > > > > something completely different that no longer contains within > > > > > > > > it the essence > > > > > > > > of the original fruit. Lose the essence and you lose the > > > > > > > > orange. > > > > > > > > > America has an essence too, and that essence is liberty. > > > > > > > > America since its > > > > > > > > inception has been defined by liberty, both the liberty of the > > > > > > > > individual > > > > > > > > and the liberty of the nation. Individual liberty means that > > > > > > > > Americans > > > > > > > > should be subject to minimal government constraints. The state > > > > > > > > exists to > > > > > > > > serve the individual (commerce, transportation, security), not > > > > > > > > to control > > > > > > > > the individual. That’s why the Bill of Rights focuses so > > > > > > > > closely on > > > > > > > > individual freedoms: the freedom to speak, the freedom to > > > > > > > > write, the > > > > > > > > freedom to worship, the freedom to defend oneself with arms, > > > > > > > > the freedom > > > > > > > > from searches and seizures, etc. Liberty also extends to the > > > > > > > > nation. Both > > > > > > > > the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are > > > > > > > > replete with > > > > > > > > examples of the Founders’ absolute obsession with national > > > > > > > > sovereignty. > > > > > > > > Just recently, we’ve been reminded of the fact that the > > > > > > > > Founders didn’t even > > > > > > > > want the appearance of impropriety and the risk of influence, > > > > > > > > since they > > > > > > > > specifically prohibited foreign emoluments for our presidents. > > > > > > > > > Despite blunders of enormous magnitude (slavery, the treatment > > > > > > > > of Native > > > > > > > > Americans, and the imprisonment of American Japanese), > > > > > > > > Americans have, for > > > > > > > > the most part, taken these freedoms with the utmost > > > > > > > > seriousness. We are a > > > > > > > > nation “of the people, by the people and for the people.” We > > > > > > > > have not > > > > > > > > allowed ourselves to be ruled by tyrannies, dictators or > > > > > > > > bureaucracies. We > > > > > > > > like our taxes low and our freedoms high. In the past 100 > > > > > > > > years, when we > > > > > > > > fight wars, we do not fight wars to conquer other people, we > > > > > > > > fight wars to > > > > > > > > free other people from tyrannies. Those on the Left who sneer > > > > > > > > at our > > > > > > > > “imperialist ventures” implicitly side with Hitler, with the > > > > > > > > North Koreans, > > > > > > > > with the Communist North Vietnamese, and with Saddam Hussein > > > > > > > > (mass murderer > > > > > > > > of his own people). While ordinary Americans shed blood so > > > > > > > > that others on > > > > > > > > foreign shores can live free, the Left cheers on those who > > > > > > > > would deny their > > > > > > > > own citizens (or the citizens of conquered nations) the same > > > > > > > > freedoms we > > > > > > > > unthinkingly enjoy. > > > > > > > > > All the freedoms I’ve discussed can very quickly be distilled > > > > > > > > into a single > > > > > > > > essence, *an American essence*: American individuals are free > > > > > > > > from control > > > > > > > > by and fear of their own government, and the American nation is > > > > > > > > free from > > > > > > > > control by other nations. > > > > > > > > > Barack Obama is anti-American because he wants to change this > > > > > > > > American > > > > > > > > essence. His domestic policy is directed at increasing > > > > > > > > government control > > > > > > > > in every area, which decreases individual liberty. Here’s an > > > > > > > > incomplete > > > > > > > > bullet-point list of his anti-liberty goals on the home front: > > > > > > > > > - He wants to remove any last vestiges of the marketplace > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > individuals’ control over their own health care, and put the > > > > > > > > government > > > > > > > > entirely in charge. > > > > > > > > - He’s willing to give government control over American > > > > > > > > businesses (i.e., > > > > > > > > Bank takeover ands Government Motors). > > > > > > > > - His administration, while on record as opposing the > > > > > > > > Fairness Doctrine, > > > > > > > > is aggressively exploring a backdoor regulatory > > > > > > > > scheme<http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1484968/obama_and_the_fairne...>that > > > > > > > > would have precisely the same practical effect as the Fairness > > > > > > > > Doctrine: it would impose government restrictions on > > > > > > > > content, rather than > > > > > > > > allowing the market (that means us, the consumers) to > > > > > > > > control content. > > > > > > > > - His FCC wants to control the > > > > > > > > internet<http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/09/new_fcc_chairman_targets_inter...>, > > > > > > > > which is a humming beehive of free speech, much of it > > > > > > > > critical of Obama. > > > > > > > > - Although he’s mostly erased the record, his dream is to > > > > > > > > create a > > > > > > > > civilian national security > > > > > > > > force<http://forthardknox.com/2008/07/16/say-what-a-400b-national-security-...>, > > > > > > > > subordinate to the administration, which would be larger > > > > > > > > than the American > > > > > > > > military. The military, please note, is controlled by the > > > > > > > > Constitution and > > > > > > > > has traditionally existed as a separate entity from any > > > > > > > > government. > > > > > > > > - He wants to take away the right to bear arms. He’ll pay > > > > > > > > lip service to > > > > > > > > supporting the Second Amendment, but his fundamental goal is > > > > > > > > to use > > > > > > > > government to remove arms from > > > > > > > > individuals<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/06/AR200...>. > > > > > > > > I’ve never held a gun in my life, but I know that the > > > > > > > > Founders understood > > > > > > > > that, for individuals, their single biggest defense against > > > > > > > > an overreaching > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
