Skip to comments.Obama: 'You Belong to Me'
Posted on 09/26/2012 5:58:37 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Liberals have never answered the question: what of those who do not choose to join in a "common end" that government has chosen for them? What of those who refuse to "belong to government"? These unfortunate souls must be dealt with, as Obama's departments and agencies are dealing with them: by silencing them, litigating against them, jailing them, and ruining their businesses and reputations. Those tactics, and more, were exactly what European leftists from Mussolini to Stalin resorted to.
Obama's tactics include his continual attacks on the opposition for what he calls "partisan bickering" -- a charge he repeated on Sept. 20 during a television interview on Univision. Actually, Obama labels every divergence from his own opinions "partisanship." This refusal to engage in reasonable discussion is the president's most distressing trait, because it is a trait that he shares with tyrants of the past. Just this week, when the Romney campaign raised the issue of the president's "bumps in the road" comment, Obama's press secretary suggested that it was "offensive" for an opponent to question the president's language. Are we at the point where a president's judgment can no longer be examined?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The falsly claimed “right not to be offended” has to be challenged more. Now people use their “being offended” as a tool to shut you up and stop all civil discourse. Simply put, if you are offended, that is your problem, deal with it and I am offended that you find offense. The idea that we can’t “offend” anybody at any time is absurd and is why we can’t celebrate Mother’s Day (those without Mothers = offended), can’t have Dad-daughter dances (those without dads = offended), can’t bring the box of 48 crayons to school (those with 8 crayons = offended) and almost every part of any comedy routine = offended. And so forth..
One thing I have observed over the years is whenever someone was very successful in accomplishing something and had a way to get around the B.S., the critics (like the libs) got p!$$ed off. They never talked on how to make things better for those who haven’t been successful such as adding value to their endeavors but those people instead want to knock down that success or punish it.
Case in point, I worked for a very liberal manager several years back. When I was 36 years old, I paid off my house and somehow he found out. He told me that it was unacceptable to be out of debt in our society. He demanded to know where I got the money to pay it off. He is in his late 50’s now and I am sure he still has a mortgage. He went on to lecture me that I need to know my place and follow society’s expectations.
BTW, I always resent how these lame people use “society’s expectations” as an excuse to dominate, control and knock you down. We also need to change ways on how we teach kids to support success, not knock it down. I remember seeing it knocked down when I was in public schools. It was different when I went to a private HS.
> Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded here and there, now and then are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all right-thinking people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty.
Are we at the point where a president’s judgment can no longer be examined?.
YES see news media and Hollywood.
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.