Skip to comments.
Prediction: Obama will use military force to dissolve State Capitals that oppose his plans
Me
| 02-18-09
| Vanity
Posted on 02/18/2009 10:12:23 AM PST by prismsinc
I'm running this outcome in my head. Based on what Rush has confirmed for me, that Obama wants to punish achievers, combined with his rampant silent signing of executive orders, and other conclusions I've come to, this seems inevitable to me.
Many States seem to be preparing to oppose the Stimulus. The outcome here can only go this way, especially if Obama is as bitter as Rush claims.
Thoughts everyone?
TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: mightyhostinthesun; staringatthesun
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-72 next last
When I studied Obama's history, I noticed that his family moved around frequently. It was quite obvious from his past that his family were active Communist sympathizers, and in those days, this was a flag for the Feds. His family must've felt displaced and hated by their country. I concluded that Obama WANTS TO DISPLACE AS MANY AMERICAN FAMILIES AS POSSIBLE. This explains his passive aggressive behavior.
1
posted on
02/18/2009 10:12:23 AM PST
by
prismsinc
To: prismsinc
WRKO keeps playing an ad about “Neighborhood Diversity”. I wonder where I’m being moved to?
2
posted on
02/18/2009 10:15:38 AM PST
by
massgopguy
(I owe everything to George Bailey)
To: prismsinc
Not the Military. They swear to uphold the Constitution.
Look to the National Civilian Security force (as big as, as armed as, and as well funded as the military) They will swear personal loyalty to 0bama.
3
posted on
02/18/2009 10:16:51 AM PST
by
null and void
(We are now in day 29 of our national holiday from reality.)
To: prismsinc
I'm running this outcome in my head. Well, there's your problem right there....
4
posted on
02/18/2009 10:16:56 AM PST
by
r9etb
To: prismsinc
Shoot.
He’s determined to replace DC for the NorthAmericanUnion
State capitals are dirt under his toenails.
Treasonous bustard.
5
posted on
02/18/2009 10:17:32 AM PST
by
Quix
(POL BOSSES say fm1900 2 presnt: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2130557/posts?page=81#81)
To: prismsinc
No. He’d have little to gain and much to lose. Besides, Obama is a naive politician in over his head, not the second coming of Stalin.
The more likely danger is that if the economy gets really bad, prominent entrepreneurs and maybe even right-wing voices will get arrested on dubious charges to the cheers of the Moveon.org crowd. That would be a dangerous precedent.
To: prismsinc
And no one has challenged this unconstitutional POS in court yet!
I guess all the lawyers are too busy chasing ambulances and fighting personal injury cases to take on something important, like defending the Constitution.
7
posted on
02/18/2009 10:19:11 AM PST
by
NTHockey
(Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners.)
To: r9etb
LOL funny!
Seriously! Am I missing something?
8
posted on
02/18/2009 10:19:18 AM PST
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: null and void
17,000 more Constitution Upholders heading overseas soon...
9
posted on
02/18/2009 10:20:36 AM PST
by
IrishPennant
("We're surrounded...That simplifies our problem.")
To: prismsinc
Using the U.S. military to enforce controversial policies would be a mistake. Many soldiers would refuse orders, creating chaos and probably mutiny that could spread rapidly.
10
posted on
02/18/2009 10:22:12 AM PST
by
Brad from Tennessee
("A politician can't give you anything he hasn't first stolen from you.")
To: null and void
To: Anti-Bubba182
*shrug* That’s how the SS got its start...
12
posted on
02/18/2009 10:23:27 AM PST
by
null and void
(We are now in day 29 of our national holiday from reality.)
To: Brad from Tennessee
That happens all the time in nations overtaken by Marxists
13
posted on
02/18/2009 10:23:32 AM PST
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: prismsinc
“Capitols” perhaps?
I’m sure Larry Nichols is probably saying the same...
14
posted on
02/18/2009 10:23:41 AM PST
by
mgstarr
("Some of us drink because we're not poets." Arthur (1981))
To: mgstarr
Yeah I debated that one! didn’t check it though...
15
posted on
02/18/2009 10:24:25 AM PST
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: mgstarr
Not according to Dictionary.com. I just looked it up. “Capitals” appears to be the correct usage.
16
posted on
02/18/2009 10:26:32 AM PST
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: Anti-Bubba182; All
However he does it, “Officials with military weapons” is my point. Let’s stay on cue.
17
posted on
02/18/2009 10:27:51 AM PST
by
prismsinc
(A.K.A. "The Terminator"!)
To: prismsinc
18
posted on
02/18/2009 10:29:54 AM PST
by
bigbob
(-)
To: Quix
>> Shoot.
If it comes down to it, I plan to.
19
posted on
02/18/2009 10:30:29 AM PST
by
Nervous Tick
(Party? I don't have one anymore.)
To: prismsinc
Your premise is wrong. Why would he have to use the military? There will be little or no resistance to this as the people gradually start to demand they get their share of the pie. Too many people are comparing Obama to the book 1984 when what they should be doing is reading--not Atlas Shrugged but Brave New World. Obamism won't be forced on the nation. It will be embraced and welcomed.
20
posted on
02/18/2009 10:31:10 AM PST
by
Darkwolf377
(Pro-Life Capitalist American Atheist and Free-Speech Junkie)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-72 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson