The onset of ODS
posted at 10:50 am on November 11, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | regular view
For the past seven-plus years, the Left has suffered from Bush Derangement Syndrome. Well, actually, the rest of us have suffered from their embrace of BDS, which one might think would inoculate us from any related maladies. As Jake Tapper notes, though, the onset of Obama Derangement Syndrome might prove that wrong:
We all remember “Bush derangement syndrome” — defined by Charles Krauthammer as “the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency — nay — the very existence of George W. Bush.”
We already need a name for the reverse disorder.
Rep. Paul Broun, R-Georgia, recently said that he fears President-elect Obama may create a security force akin to the Gestapo to impose a Marxist dictatorship.
“It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he’s the one who proposed this national security force,” Broun told The Associated Press. “I’m just trying to bring attention to the fact that we may – may not, I hope not – but we may have a problem with that type of philosophy of radical socialism or Marxism.”
Broun refers to this portion of a speech Obama gave in July in Colorado. The media dropped two sentences from its reporting of the speech, which set off critics when World Net Daily reported it:
We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.
At the time, Obama’s supporters claimed that he meant the Peace Corps and other volunteer organizations. That seems a stretch, but so does Broun’s interpretation of it. As I wrote at the time, the nation already has a number of non-military national security forces, including the FBI, ICE, Border Patrol, and so on. If we want to fund that better, many conservatives would agree, but not funding it to the same extent as the military. In the context of Obama’s remarks above, though, he fairly clearly meant to at least include a volunteer force in outreach within and outside the US as some sort of Department of Peace-like indirect boost to national security.
Nothing in that speech hints at a Gestapo-like organization at all. I’d agree that we have to remain vigilant at all times to ensure that the government doesn’t try to impose such a regime upon us, but this is an extremely thin reed to grasp for such a conclusion. Although I supported a freer hand at the NSA in monitoring communications with one end in the US for possible terrorist activities given the dangers we face in this era, it’s far easier for the government to turn that into a Gestapo than what Obama proposed. That’s why I understood the Left’s opposition to it (as well as a small minority of conservatives) and thought reasonable safeguards against potential abuse were appropriate, as the eventual compromise in Congress provided.
If we plan to offer a rational alternative to the coming debacle of the next two years, then we’d better stick to facts and eschew hyperbole. We need to oppose the reality of the radical agenda proposed by Obama and the Democratic majorities in Congress, not fantasies spun out of context-free snippets of speeches. The more critics invoke Hitler and Stalin instead of Jimmy Carter and Lyndon Johnson, the better the reality of Obama, Reid, and Pelosi will seem in 2010.
Addendum: Also, can we please get rid of this canard?
“We can’t be lulled into complacency,” Broun said. “You have to remember that Adolf Hitler was elected in a democratic Germany. I’m not comparing him to Adolf Hitler. What I’m saying is there is the potential.”
No, he wasn’t. Hitler was never elected to any office. He became Chancellor because of a deal struck between political factions warring with each other in the twilight of Weimar Germany, appointed to the position by President von Hindenburg. The Nazis never even won a majority in the Reichstag, and in fact lost seats in the last free elections before Hitler became Chancellor. Unlike in most parliamentary systems, the executive in Germany did not need to hold a seat in the Reichstag. The Weimar system never had the support of the German people, and the reversion to strong-man rule was almost inevitable.
And unlike Germany, we will get free elections in two years. If we want to win majorities back, we’ll need to stop invoking Nazis at every turn.
Update: I’m going to add this here rather than reposting it every 50 comments or so in the thread. Nothing in this post says we should refrain from criticizing Obama. I’m just arguing that we have to stick to the facts rather than screeching historically inaccurate references to Nazis every time we disagree with Obama. No one will have any credibility left if we all give into the impulse to act like the Kos Kiddies for the next two years.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 9 Next »
In this paragraph:
… you made such a good point, Ed will not address it, and if he does, will do so dismissively and inadequately.
The only possible argument to your point is: “You’re wrong. The left would have been much happier with Cheney, Wolfowitz, and/or Gingrich in power.”
However, many on the right could have lived with a Hillary Clinton Presidency because while we may not like nor trust her, we don’t see her as a threat in the same sense that we see Obama.
So Ed Morrissey is categorically wrong when he equates “BDS” with connecting the dots about Obama specifically.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 2:33 PM
Neither Johnson nor Carter are a fit in this line-up. BHO seems a natural.
Serr8d on November 11, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Don’t count on it. You may not have to pay to vote (unless Obama puts a Poll Tax on all of those “redneck racist morons”) but the concept of free and fair elections in this country is gone forever after last Tuesday.
The Democrats will make sure they have them rigged. They have ACORN oout there registering people 10 times to vote, dead people only five times and superheroes only three. They own the election officials and state attorneys so there will be no investigations of “ireegularities”, their propaganda wing will destroy all who oppose them and George Soros’s employees will have zillions of pre paid Visa cards to make sure whoever the Dem candidates are have plenty of “campaign donations from the common people”.
Nope, the Democrats are going to stay in power for a very, very long time. They have paid good money to make sure that happens. The only way it will change is if the cold civil war goes hot.
Nahanni on November 11, 2008 at 2:34 PM
I’m starting to think that there may be a greater chance of a backlash against Obama from his current supporters, than ODS from those who have not supported him.
The expectations are SOOO high, he is bound to fail. When he does, the KoolAid drinkers may be the ones to turn on him, rather than those who have opposed him from the beginning.
Star20 on November 11, 2008 at 2:34 PM
AD HOMINEM ATTACK WITHOUT EVIDENCE 11!!111!!!
Is someone is suffering from ODS?
Surely O wouldn’t do anything bad. And, even if he did, it’s not right to criticize him.
mockmook on November 11, 2008 at 2:34 PM
I do lie awake at night worrying about this. I worked in financial services and I know how bad it can still get.
Our country went completely mental this year over a slight uptick in unemployment and the collapse of a few big investment banks. There are few left who lived through the Great Depression or WWII. What will our spoiled, coddled current generations do if another Depression occurs, or even something that is merely worse than anything they have seen in their lives? Already we are seeing people panic and put their money in the mattress, refusing to buy cars or anything else. I fear that even a serious deep recession will have voters clamoring for political changes that we can’t even comprehend now.
I do not worry so much about what Barack Obama is trying to sell as I do what Americans may start to demand.
rockmom on November 11, 2008 at 2:35 PM
-
yeah that’s what people think when you call someone a NAZI is that they were socialists… National Socialists… /sarc
-
no that’s not what they think… they think murderous genocidal racist that’s what they think.
-
so yes a Nazi is a socialist but a socialist is not necessarily a Nazi… there are socialists in every government in the world. can’t think of many Nazis in every government.
-
so if you think I’m calling someone a Nazi just because I say they are a socialist then you are simply wrong… if I think someone is a Nazi, I’ll call them a Nazi. I have never called Obama a Nazi and doubt I ever will, but a Socialist he is…
Kaptain Amerika on November 11, 2008 at 2:35 PM
Maybe this is what Biden was alluding to when he said the faithful would have to convince the rest of Americans to go along with Obama’s response to the coming ‘challenge’ that would confront Obama within 6 months of being elected. I sense that Biden sat in on the discusssion for possible responses and took it upon himself to prepare the American people for some of the unacceptable responses that Obama might implement (martial law, expanded gun control, Patriot Act Domestic version, Fairness Doctrine squared). Biden just wanted to prepare the people so the ‘transistion’ would go smoothly.
jerseyman on November 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM
The never-ending string of articles written by conservatives telling those of us who didn’t vote for Obama to get over it is becoming even more annoying than the bleating of his sheep wanting us to join hands and sign peace songs with them.
At the risk of being crude – STFU. The election was barely a week ago. We should be allowed to vent for some period of time about the stupidity of people who voted for an empty suit spouting simplistic platitutes. Nothing the man has done to date has eliminated the concerns of people who voted against him.
ODS will only be a valid accusation if he ends up not being the vapid, socialist. leftist smug pig some people think he is. ODS can be called when/if we start blaming him for things not under his control – like hurricanes, mass fish kills, earthquakes.
katiejane on November 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Amen.
Glynn on November 11, 2008 at 2:37 PM
The Constitution is a piece of paper. It has survived all these years because there have been enough strong-willed people willing to “preserve, protect, and defend” and OBEY it as the supreme law of the nation, and its authority was challenged militarily in 1861-1865.
If Obama wants to impose liberal fascism, there are two barriers according to the Constitution–between 41 and 43 Republican Senators who can filibuster (depending on whether Norm Coleman and Saxby Chambliss win), and five Supreme Court justices, one of whom (Anthony Kennedy) wavers on critical issues.
Obama could easily impose the Fairness Doctrine, to stifle any conservative dissent on talk radio, if he so decided, and Democrats in Congress agreed. If the “civilian national security force” is established and armed, Obama could enforce a police state, declare martial law and cancel all future elections.
If the Constitution is flouted, and thare is no legal recourse, there is one last bastion–the 57 million people who voted for McCain. They need to be aware of the danger, and willing to fight for their freedom if necessary.
This is not “Democrat Derangement Syndrome”, or conservatives just being upset over losing an election. Neither Jimmy Carter nor Bill Clinton ever proposed creating a civilian goon squad, or said he was ready to “rule”, and neither of them were trained by racist preachers and Chicago radicals and anarchists. Obama is far more dangerous than either Carter or Clinton, and the people need to be warned.
Steve Z on November 11, 2008 at 2:38 PM
The election’s over. You can stop stalking me. Besides, aren’t you supposed to be swearing like a sailor and referring to the whole site as “idiots”?
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 2:39 PM
The phrase “calm down” has always been offensive to me. As if to say, you are hysterical and therefore illogical. I am not a child. I’m with you Katie.
Glynn on November 11, 2008 at 2:39 PM
jerseyman on November 11, 2008 at 2:36 PM
Yeah, pretty much. But Ed Morrissey’s so blind on this issue, he won’t see it… nor understand why Obama chose Biden in the first place, which I’ve been saying since the day of the announcement.
Obama wanted a weak second in command who lacks credibility, and he wanted this on purpose so he couldn’t be challenged for leadership, nor lightly impeached when he starts imposing his agenda.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 2:40 PM
Yes, I’m well aware of that. As I stated previously, I was responding to a commenter who asserted that “only” a Constitutional Convention stood between us and… etc.
Gilda on November 11, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Well, look at it this way. The Democraps wil have no one to blame for their lame policies. I’m ready to spend all that capital we built up over the past eight years they have been bashing, which history will one day say, one of the better Presidents of America prior to it’s Marxist take-over.
0321_GUY on November 11, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Peter Wehner has a very similar post up on Contentions blog, decrying ODS. If I only had a dollar for every one of these lets “lose with honor” posts by the the Republican high horses.
Look, BDS won–it won BIG. They threw everything they had at Bush. No charge was to flimsy, personal, dishonest or unpatriotic, while the “lose with honor” crowd responded with restraint, when they responded at all. And where do we end up? The BDS crowd now controls the House, the Senate and the White House. And the mature, restrained, responsible party is defeated and scorned.
BDS won. Why won’t “ODS” win, Ed? Or is it your view that the self satisfaction of “losing with honor” makes up for losing election after election?
james23 on November 11, 2008 at 2:44 PM
That’s no doubt why you wrote:
You, and your defenders, have refused repeated requests to actually say what those barriers are, and now you argue essentially the opposite, agreeing with econavenger and saying you’re “well aware of that.”
Slyly.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 2:47 PM
I think we saw the beginning of it in front of the Philadelphia polling place with the “new black panther” thugs trying to intimidate voters. It’s time for moderate Republicans(almost dems) to leave the battlefield and for the real Conservatives to step up. It is no longer in the interest of the United States for us to play nice – It’s time to bring this country back to the Constitution before we lose our Rights.
Keep your powder dry.
Blackhawk45 on November 11, 2008 at 2:50 PM
Actually, that didn’t happen, although Giuliani did propose it. The election had to be postponed a bit, because the primaries were taking place on 11 September, and at least one precinct site had become a smoking pile of rubble. But his successor took office on the usual date of 1 January.
silverpie on November 11, 2008 at 2:51 PM
I noted the primary barrier, in the first comment of this post, which you ignored:
Understandable that you would willfully ignore such a point, since Canadians have already surrendered theirs.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 2:51 PM
I tend to call it masochism, because you only reap abuse when you do it, but yours is much more optimistic.
Look, there’s nothing wrong with assuming the worst about Obama. I never said for a minute that I felt otherwise. However, once you let your beliefs in Obama taint his every action and taint everything bad that happens in America, especially if it’s unwarranted, then you have let yourself become deranged.
That’s what the Left did with Bush and Katrina. Copy it if you want to be that. I personally won’t.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 2:52 PM
Agreed, and a good point.
However, it would be well if those sounding the horn of warning, did so with historically accurate and relevant details. I think Broun fell a bit short of that goal.
philwynk on November 11, 2008 at 2:54 PM
Obama could easily impose the Fairness Doctrine, to stifle any conservative dissent on talk radio, if he so decided, and Democrats in Congress agreed. If the “civilian national security force” is established and armed, Obama could enforce a police state, declare martial law and cancel all future elections.
Steve Z on November 11, 2008 at 2:38 PM
Do you even know what the Fairness Doctrine is?
DcMike2K on November 11, 2008 at 2:54 PM
My concern isn’t that Obama = Hitler. It’s Obama’s associations with communists, marxists, terrorists, and rabid racists in combination with his rhetoric that backs up same.
If the man is a marxist, which is NOT a stretch by his own words he’s uttered in the last 2 years, then his redistribution scheme, his national police force idea, his anti gun stance are all valid concerns. If loud noises (at the very least) aren’t made in opposition to this, what do YOU think would happen?
Don’t be a fool. Vigilance comes with a voice, a loud one at that. If the vigilant are considered fools, so be it as long as what is feared does not come to pass because of ‘the fools’.
On the other hand, don’t bury your damned head in the sand and decry everything as conspiracy theory and ODS. This may be the USA, but that does not mean strange and abhorrent things can’t happen. To close your eyes and ears to it all is as stupid as firing shots at the whitehouse just because you don’t like the president. In other words, don’t fly in the complete opposite direction just because some are alarmed at Obama’s marxist tendencies.
Spiritk9 on November 11, 2008 at 2:57 PM
I have a problem, wondering if some of you cold help me out.
I have always used the term African-American, but now I find out the term Africa is a continent, and would not pertain to a race of people.
So do we now call “colored” people Darfur-Americans or Sudan-Americans?
Do I now correct everyone when they say African-American, and say that is not correct, Africa is a continent and not a country of origin?
right2bright on November 11, 2008 at 2:57 PM
I think Broun had good instincts, but probably not a huge understanding of the history so he used the nearest example he could find.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 2:58 PM
Right, cause VPs normally call for their presidents to be impeached when they do something wrong rather than try to protect their own.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 2:59 PM
Yes. Exactly.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 2:59 PM
I agree with the contention that Biden was chosen specifically as insurance against impeachment leading to removal. A repeat of the Clinton strategy of choosing Al Gore knowing that Scottish Law, or similar diversion, would be invoked to excuse any groping of the hired help and to protect the nation from Albert the Dense replacing an evicted Slick as president.
In many ways Cheney being VP helped safeguard W from the Dems threats of impeachment. The prospect of Cheney knocking heads and taking names as CINC was a danger the Dems were unwilling to risk.
viking01 on November 11, 2008 at 3:00 PM
I can’t speak for that poster, but it’s true that the Fairness Doctrine would kill conservative talk radio. Very few have credibly argued otherwise.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 3:01 PM
Dispassionate discussions from the base on the merits of their case seldom ignite high voter turnout. ODS will be an essential element for planting the seeds of mistrust and discontent in the public against the candidate in power. It needs to be incessant and on every front that the opposition party takes. That’s what the Dems finally realized when they kicked the milquetoast leadership out of the House and Senate and that’s the bat the Repubs will have to willingly step up to the plate and begin swinging with if they ever hope to win back the electorate.
Sailfish on November 11, 2008 at 3:01 PM
This is so true — we must stick to the facts and argue reasonably; we must avoid, at all costs, unfair analogies and over-reaction…that’s what the left does, and we loathe it accordingly.
I’ve said it before: President-elect Obama deserves our prayers and encouragement — but he does not deserve unquestioned acceptance of his policies.
Richard Romano on November 11, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Not “normally”, no.
(God damn you’re stupid.)
And they are 2 separate processes, one constitutional and the other extra-constitutional, where Obama strengthened his hand by choosing a weak VP. I of course outlined both processes, one of which has nothing to do with the VP, but you got them mixed up to make a non-point.
If we are right, Obama is different than any President that America has had before, so using words like “normally” is dumb.
Further, YOU are the person who said American could have had Hitler incarnate as its leader and it would have been nothing more than a footnote in history because the constitution would have stopped him.
If that’s not retarded, what is?
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:03 PM
Bundle up. Your mother’s basement must be cold this time of year.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:05 PM
Until the MSM aids and abets anti-Obama ODS in lieu of its current aiding and abetting pro-Obama ODS, I’m calling ODSDS: Obama Derangement Syndrome Derangement Syndrome–obsessing on the obsessed.
Christien on November 11, 2008 at 3:05 PM
” We would be much better off with a different far left liberal as President. Hillary, Sharpton, Kucinich, Bernie Sanders or Barney Frank are all better than an unstable narcissistic demagogic Chicago thug organizer with a messiah complex.
Those on the left with BDS never would have said, “Bush is a dangerous dictator type, we would be better off with Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Armey, Newt Gingrich or…” You get the picture.”
—
Exactly.
Alana on November 11, 2008 at 3:06 PM
I’m getting really tired of these nice guys like Ed who keep losing elections because they are too nice to criticize Democrats. So now ODS equals criticizing Obama? That’s what Ed thinks. Give us all a break.
Obama has proposed a Marxist style “civilian security force” that, in his own words, will be funded just as much as the regular army, will not be voluntary, and will have weapons.
And if anyone criticizes this proposal or calls it Marxist, that person has ODS? Ed Morrissey is as bad as these country-club, inside-the-beltway Republicans if he really believes that. I’m so tired of these type of Republicans that care more about what Democrats think than about winning elections or standing up for conservative values.
Gabe on November 11, 2008 at 3:07 PM
This is so true — we must stick to the facts and argue reasonably; we must avoid, at all costs, unfair analogies and over-reaction…that’s what the left does, and we loathe it accordingly.
I’ve said it before: President-elect Obama deserves our prayers and encouragement — but he does not deserve unquestioned acceptance of his policies.
Richard Romano on November 11, 2008 at 3:02 PM
Try understanding this comment, the blockquoted part. Just try.
BDS and sounding a warning about Obama aren’t the same thing at all.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:07 PM
Of course, they are valid concerns. But let’s see what he actually proposes before we start the armed insurrection. And let’s not jump from there to the cancellation of elections and opening reeducation camps for conservatives.
rockmom on November 11, 2008 at 3:08 PM
I notice you never quote the part that demonstrates just how stupid she is.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:08 PM
No. ODS means saying Obama is Hitler less than a week after the election.
Which an astonishing and frightening amount of people are doing in this post.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:08 PM
I notice you consider everything you believe to be proven fact, even with no proof whatsoever. That’s called narcissism. 200 proof, at that.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:09 PM
“ODS means saying Obama is Hitler less than a week after the election.”
No one has said Obama is Hitler. We’ve said he’s dangerous and clearly shows signs given by other totalitarianism leaders and Marxists.
However, to the limited degree you have a point, it would be better to sound such an alarm a week after the election than after Obama has taken power and had time to implement much of his agenda… if we’re correct, would it not?
Are you capable of giving an honest answer to that question? If so, what is your answer?
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:11 PM
I guess you’re trying to show us.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 3:12 PM
To help you out, she wrote Hitler incarnate in the American Presidency would make but a footnote in history. Do you not think that is stupid?
Or are you so stupid you agree with it?
(I think you know it’s stupid, which is why you didn’t blockquote it.)
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:13 PM
That’s three uses of the word “stupid” in one post. Impressive how gargantuan your id is.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:15 PM
The Weather Underground wanted this, as well as saw the need for mass executions — in the tens of millions (i.e., no more than in the Soviet Union and less than in China) of those who couldn’t be reeducated.
For what it’s worth. Obama’s pals.
Folks, the Communists had bloodier records than Hitler. Not less so.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:16 PM
I knew you didn’t have it in you.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:17 PM
…and you called ME a liar?
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:17 PM
ODS is also doing a complete freakout over marginal policy proposals like a civilian security force, which was a toss-off comment by Obama in a single speech. Or the whole Fairness Doctrine crap. Democrats would love to send us all down blind alleys like this, fighting chimerical Communists and calling everything Marxist, while they rob us blind with high taxes and destroy American capitalism with shit like Card Check, repeal of class action reform and bankruptcy reform, windfall profits taxes on the oil companies, etc.
They’re setting a trap for us, and it looks like we are falling right into it.
rockmom on November 11, 2008 at 3:17 PM
That’s because he’s my Hot Air lover, if you listen to right4life, which most people don’t. If you listen to wise, which most people don’t, we’re one in the same.
Either way I have an ally here, because I know how to have a respectful conversation. Should you ever learn to do the same, you may find you have people willing to defend you as well.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 3:18 PM
What a shock! An atheist RINO thinks everybody who can take a few minutes out of their lives and compare Obama’s statements and policy plans to the various forms of historical fascism “astonishing and frightening.”
A spineless RINO who is worried about appearances? I’m simply flabbergasted.
/
TMK on November 11, 2008 at 3:19 PM
*No. ODS means saying Obama is Hitler less than a week after the election.
Which an astonishing and frightening amount of people are doing in this post.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:08 PM*
Who called Obama “Hitler?” A Congressman correctly called Obama’s “National Civilian Security Force” that Obama wants to be funded just as much as the military as something very similar to what you had with Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao, etc. That is not ODS; that is the truth.
Wimpy conservatives, like Madison “Conservative” and Ed Morrissey are the WORST thing for the Republican party; they care more about being accepted members in liberal society, be it Madison or McLean, than in standing up for conservative values.
If Ed thinks that criticizing Obama’s National Civilian Security Force is ODS, than he is truly not helping the conservative cause.
By the way, Michelle Malkin obviously thinks that Ed’s post on ODS was ridiculous. She is now linking to a critical post of it on Protein Wisdom: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=13635
Gabe on November 11, 2008 at 3:19 PM
Hey Ed.
I understand what your saying.
But can we at least have FDS: Franken Derangement Syndrome?
Come on, give us a bone to gnaw on. Colman isn’t exactly Reagan either is he?
Sapwolf on November 11, 2008 at 3:20 PM
I’m neither an atheist nor a RINO. Try again with more ignorant BS about who you think I am.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:20 PM
Esthier, when you say crap like Adolf Hitler incarnate in the White House would be but a footnote in history, and that’s just the beginning of your stupidity in this thread, that’s what you get.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:21 PM
Good god. The denial is staggering.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:21 PM
And succeeding quite nicely, at that!
It’s fun to watch little trolls beclown themselves. I especially like it when they jump up and down, shrieking incessantly for attention, working themselves into a frothy lather of childish insults. They dance to our tune and at our command.
Doubt me? Just watch…
(Rock vs. hard place gauntlet thrown, which will it be, heeheehee…)
Gilda on November 11, 2008 at 3:21 PM
A few months ago Obama’s close friend Bill Ayers spoke in Venezuela addressing Hugo Chavex and other leaders there.
His comments seem to fit the idea of a force much like Venezuela has – so the claim that Obama wants a civilian force that is similar to those of Socialist/Marxist nations is not at all hard to believe – especially since Obama and Ayers have THE SAME PHILOSOPHY/BELIEFS when it comes to education!
From Bill Ayers speech to Chavez in Venezuela:
“I began teaching when I was 20 years old in a small freedom school affiliated with the Civil Rights Movement in the United States. The year was 1965, and I’d been arrested in a demonstration. Jailed for ten days, I met several activists who were finding ways to link teaching and education with deep and fundamental social change. They were following Dewey and DuBois, King and Helen Keller who wrote: “We can’t have education without revolution. We have tried peace education for 1,900 years and it has failed. Let us try revolution and see what it will do now.”“
TheMightyQuinn on November 11, 2008 at 3:21 PM
I notice you have not yet had a response to my post about this being an armed society. You’re content to simply go on calling people retarded.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Ed,
The real problem is that Obama flipped and flopped so much that nobody really knows which promises, or pronouncements, uttered at which point in the campaign, will he choose to try and pass…
And, which aspects of his hidden ideology and wish list agenda that we all never heard of will also be foisted upon us. I agree that in some ways the Hitler and Stalin analogies need to be refrained from; but where the shoe fits, well, you know…
RocketmanBob on November 11, 2008 at 3:24 PM
Wow. I can’t believe some of the stuff I’m reading here.
I’m sure that’s probably what just about everybody on this thread is thinking, for one reason or the other.
capitalist piglet on November 11, 2008 at 3:25 PM
If you think I give a sh!t what you say about me, you’re sorely mistaken. There’s a reason I haven’t bothered to respond to your attacks. Go ahead and call me stupid.
I want people like you to think I’m stupid. It makes my f-ing day.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Who on this thread, including Rep. Broun, has called Obama Hitler?
It would be ridiculous to do so. Hitler was a white supremacist who refused to shake African-American Jesse Owens’ hand.
At most, some of us are saying there are certain similarities in that both created cults of personalities, held mass rallies (in Berlin), and created symbols of power.
Also we point out the mechanism Hitler rose to power and that some of those things are possible in the United States or anywhere.
However, most of us believe Obama has far more in common with Marxists (i.e., Communists, i.e., Leninists, all of which Ronald Reagan referred to by name at his Goldwater convention speech), and that Marxists are anti-freedom, anti-capitalism, and have very bit as bloody a record as the Nazis, in some countries, and less so, but still bloody, in others.
At best Obama wants to bring in increased socialism.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:27 PM
You said Hitler incarnate in power in the U.S. would be a mere footnote in history. No wonder you’re not worried about Obama in power regardless of how Marxist, corrupt, or ruthless he is or isn’t for that matter.
Esthier, you’re stupid.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:28 PM
To amend the Constitution you are correct.
But although rewriting the whole Constitution would, in my and, apparently, your understanding would should entail at the very least the same requirements, with a complicit EB, LB, and JB viewing the Constitution as a dynamic document subject to the whims of individual interpretation, it’s all up for grabs.
As for thinking “is this immanent”, I point out that the SCOTUS found a “penumbra of privacy” allowing for abortion on demand. And look at all the abuses by the federal government which we have accepted over the years.
Yes, under an Obama administration, I do see further abuse, if not an actual rewriting, of our Constitution likely.
If that is ODS, I carry the red badge proudly.
davidk on November 11, 2008 at 3:29 PM
What a shock! A lying, self-loathing, practical-atheist RINO who would rather polute a blog with his meaningless “fears” than offer anything substantive!
There, I fixed it for ya, RINO.
TMK on November 11, 2008 at 3:29 PM
How amusing. You still consider yourself ‘the whole site.’
wise_man on November 11, 2008 at 3:29 PM
…which is exactly what the left did for the last eight years.
And you scoffed and were outraged at it for the last eight years.
And predictably, some of the sore losers of this election, as opposed to people who lost, are engaging in the exact same tripe.
You are no different, and no better.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:30 PM
What makes you think he’s a RINO? He’s someone who argued this entire time against McCain, specifically because of McCain’s RINO creds. Did you argue about a social conservative issue and find him lacking? What is it?
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 3:31 PM
You’ve posted only in this thread to attack me. Please stop stalking me.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:31 PM
I completely believe you, which is what makes it so fun to watch.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 3:33 PM
Listen up. You have demonstrated that you do not know either my spiritual beliefs, nor my political beliefs, and you have also demonstrated no interest in knowing what they are. Kindly go stick your head in a blender and press “puree”.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:34 PM
The election’s over, so he’s a little bored.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 3:34 PM
This is the crux of every argument you have with those who disagree, it seems.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:34 PM
I missed that post. However, I’ve addressed it in essence in numerous posts I’ve been writing for weeks.
The United States federal government has a vast nuclear arsenal at its sole disposal, and no state has control of a single tactical nuclear weapon, and of course private citizens may not own tanks, jet fighters, anti-armour weapons, anti-aircraft missiles, etc.
I don’t think hand guns and rifles would be sufficient to wrest control of the United States from the federal government, if it ever came down to it.
However, Obama doesn’t need to impose a military dictatorship, although his call until scrutiny called him to pull the curtain back over it, of a Civilian National Security Force with a 500 billion dollar per year budget is troubling.
What Obama can do instead is as several people here have pointed out, increase immigration, rig the elections in his favour (he’s already doing this), limit free speech, and take additional steps to assure a permanent majority, including putting more people on the dole, which is one of his top priorities, earning their votes.
To wit his income tax cut for people who don’t pay income tax.
You see how I will address your questions, even though I think you’re a fool, but you sidestep all of mine?
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:35 PM
Sigh. There is no way in 2, 4 or 8 years this is going to end without violence. There is too much emotions invested on either side of this to let it go peacefully
E9RET on November 11, 2008 at 3:37 PM
No, you dishonest hack, you’ll see I point out why her argument makes no sense first. You pointedly avoid cutting and pasting those parts of my post.
Yes, MadisonConservative, you’re a liar in addition to being a fool.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:38 PM
That’s exactly what people said in this election, and here we are, peacefully letting Obama take the White House without open revolt.
This is what America stands for. If you forget that, don’t expect them to remind you when it’s our turn for power.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 3:39 PM
Well, you’re wrong. Only a fool uses the following as an argument:
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:40 PM
Related, sorta;
To what extent can changes to the government organizations/agencies, policies, and laws be done with executive order?
Genuine question on my part.
The President-elect’s staff has already given considerable talking points on the subject of executive orders already.
cryptojunkie on November 11, 2008 at 3:40 PM
You said that Ed is a coward.
I noted that you said Ed was a coward.
You said I was a liar for doing so.
You apparently haven’t a clue about dishonesty.
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:41 PM
ugh, butchered that sentence
cryptojunkie on November 11, 2008 at 3:43 PM
You’re a liar, MadisonConservative, you know full well that was a conclusion, not an argument, and was based on me publicly and repeatedly deconstructing her ridiculous arguments, and her having no responses for it… that made any sense.
None that made even enough sense for you to quote.
Yes. I flat-out call you a liar.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:43 PM
Correction: I said you and Ed are cowards to the degree that Neville Chamberlain and other decent (in his case) but “reasonable” men throughout history have been cowards.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:44 PM
Conservatives are allowed to vent and express ODS. You just can’t have it be the organizing principle of your opposition movement. I know it hurts to admit it but…the reason why Dems out performed Republicans at the polls isn’t because Republicans stayed home. Republicans have been losing the Party ID battle since 2004 forward. There are simply more Democrat registered voters than Republicans. That’s not because of BDS. That’s because of outreach efforts. Screaming about Hitler, infanticide, coke sniffing, Jeremiah Wright what have you isn’t going to undo any of that.
DeathToMediaHacks on November 11, 2008 at 3:45 PM
You’re even too much of a coward to answer simple questions.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:45 PM
I see plenty of potential abuse under an Obama administration. I doubt that it will reach the Constitutional level because of the inherent unwieldiness of that process. His judicial appointments may cause lasting damage, as would the appointments of any contemporary Dem as President.
If I thought that extremist, invective-laden, conspiracy-tinged ODS would actually work to advance the cause of liberty and limited government I might be inclined to favor it. I don’t think it will though.
Like Ed said:
I don’t want the next election to hinge on voters saying “you Republicans said there’d be concentration camps under Obama and there aren’t so the Dems must be doing good” or similar. I’d prefer them to be aware that we warned of demonstrable, hits-home issues like tax increases and unnecessary economic deterioration, and that we’re able to provide a credible alternative.
Gilda on November 11, 2008 at 3:45 PM
Feel the love. The warm rays of happiness emanating from the computer screen. A sweet kiss like a tazer at close range. The gentle touch of a snowball with an icicle inside. The idiots angry at the retards. The retards angry at the idiots. Feel the love.
C’mon, we’re made of sterner stuff than this. Save the arrows for the opposition. There’s battles ahead with greater dangers lurking than ourselves. The front is ahead not beside you. Forward march. Thank you.
viking01 on November 11, 2008 at 3:46 PM
That’s not a correction. That’s an admission.
Esthier on November 11, 2008 at 3:47 PM
It’s not exclusively because of that. The electorate shifts left. The socialist programs breed more dependent voters, and they vote socialist. Obama will create that in spades starting with his income tax cut for the 48% of Americans that don’t pay income tax.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:47 PM
Ah, arguing terms now? Very cute.
Correction:
Uh oh, I quoted your words again. I guess it’s just more of me “lying”. I missed the nuance. I took it out of context. If I point out your words, then I’m a liar. If you say them, they are always true.
You’re a case study in narcissism, you know that?
MadisonConservative on November 11, 2008 at 3:48 PM
Yes, but Ed is simply wrong. Barack Obama doesn’t have Jimmy Carter nor Lyndon Johnson’s background and isn’t the same type of man.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:48 PM
The 64,000 dollar question.
Who is going to go against an Obama Executive Order? Reid? Pelosi?
Right now the only safeguard is the SCOTUS. But for how long.
And whoever brings suit against Obama will be subjected to Joe the Plimber treatment. He or she will have to self-defend from all kinds of accusations whether true or false.
davidk on November 11, 2008 at 3:49 PM
MadisonConservative, you once again dishonest hack, you know I was making a correction of your post, and pointing out that I called you a coward as well. In fact, in my correction of your post, I bolded the word you.
You’re definitely a liar. You’re a puke.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:50 PM
I pray you are correct.
davidk on November 11, 2008 at 3:51 PM
There. I corrected it for you.
Christoph on November 11, 2008 at 3:51 PM
Wow. Our cup runneth over. I haven’t seen a thread brimming with so much mutual respect and oozing with so much love since the Darwinian Evolution threads.
My collie says:
You attended a Reverend Wright sermon?
My collie says:
And just what book would that be?
My collie says:
Et tu, collie?
My collie says:
So how’d they win then?
My collie says:
Smart dog.
CyberCipher on November 11, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 9 Next »