The Founding Fathers wouldn't approve???

[AcidFlashGordon]

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot??

Video: Obama Says Founding Fathers Wouldn't Approve of Tea Party


I find this just more stupid bullshit that Obastard has pulled out of his ass. The group (Tea Party) that's all for smaller, less intrusive government wouldn't be approved by the group (Founding Fathers) who wanted small, unobtrusive government?

Sometimes I wonder just how Obastard can walk around without falling flat on his face because he's just too effin' stupid to be able to walk and breathe at the same time. Chewing gum and walking? WAAAAAY beyond his mental condition to attempt.

Not to mention that THIS part is true:

Second, the founders would have been bloody shooting by now.

 

[txbikerman]

doesn't surprise me he said that. In his fucked up mind , he doesn't have a clue about what his country stands for and why is was established how it was.

 

[winchster]

doesn't surprise me he said that. In his $#@!ed up mind , he doesn't have a clue about what his country stands for and why is was established how it was.

That's where you're wrong, he fully understands both of those things. He also promised to fundamentally change it.

 

[V-Tach]

Demonize, marginalize and isolate.....all part of the game plan.....

 

[shortround]

As a disciple of Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, he knows that he has to lie to achieve his ends. Lie, work within the system, and collapse it so it can be fundamentally changed. No Hope. All Change for the Worse.

 

[inceptor]

That's where you're wrong, he fully understands both of those things. He also promised to fundamentally change it.

This is what he campaigned on, fundamental change.

 

[festering]

Would they have approved of a black President?

 

[LJH]

Would they have approved of a black President?

Yes

 

[cbigclarke]

I wish I never clicked on this thread

 

[LJH]

I wish I never clicked on this thread

Me too but it is a chance to educate so here we go...

Global Watch - 1st President was Black - A "Black" Man, A Moor, John Hanson

 

[mosin]

Me too but it is a chance to educate so here we go...

Global Watch - 1st President was Black - A "Black" Man, A Moor, John Hanson

oh sweet it's education time...

That John Hanson was white

 

[oldguy]

Demonize, marginalize and isolate.....all part of the game plan.....[/QUOTE Exactly divide and conquer and it's working, if he gets Pelosi/Reid in 2014 America will be gone as we know it.

 

[jrbfishn]

I wish I never clicked on this thread

With you on that........


from a non-recovering coffeeholic

 

[Shooter McGavin]

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot??

Video: Obama Says Founding Fathers Wouldn't Approve of Tea Party


I find this just more stupid bullshit that Obastard has pulled out of his ass. The group (Tea Party) that's all for smaller, less intrusive government wouldn't be approved by the group (Founding Fathers) who wanted small, unobtrusive government?

Sometimes I wonder just how Obastard can walk around without falling flat on his face because he's just too effin' stupid to be able to walk and breathe at the same time. Chewing gum and walking? WAAAAAY beyond his mental condition to attempt.

Not to mention that THIS part is true:

Complete bullshit, yes! Too effin' stupid, I'm afraid not.
He, just as most liberals, spew their ridiculous ideology rhetoric for all the lame stream media to inform and educate the masses. Think of the individuals that cling to this administrations every word and side with it no matter how completely incorrect it is, "over half of our country". For all they know, or even care for that matter is the Tea Party is nothing more than a bunch of disgruntled, red necks who are pissed off they lost the election and hate ovomit because he's black. It has absolutely nothing to do with objective principles or facts what so ever. He's playing the tune for the so termed "low information voter" who knows no better and goes only by what they're told by the barackistanian media companies.

 

[cbigclarke]

Would they have approved of a black President?

should i take offense to this?

 

[oldguy]

I would expect this to be Obama's guide:Saul Alinsky’s 12 Rules for Radicals

Here is the complete list from Alinsky.

* RULE 1: “Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks youhave.” Power is derived from 2 main sources – money and people. “Have-Nots”must build power from flesh and blood. (These are two things of which there isa plentiful supply. Government and corporations always have a difficult timeappealing to people, and usually do so almost exclusively with economicarguments.)

* RULE 2: “Never go outside the expertise of your people.” It results inconfusion, fear and retreat. Feeling secure adds to the backbone of anyone.(Organizations under attack wonder why radicals don’t address the “real”issues. This is why. They avoid things with which they have no knowledge.)

* RULE 3: “Whenever possible, go outside the expertise of the enemy.” Look forways to increase insecurity, anxiety and uncertainty. (This happens all thetime. Watch how many organizations under attack are blind-sided by seeminglyirrelevant arguments that they are then forced to address.)

* RULE 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule isthat every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them withthis because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is aserious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is atstake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments,they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

* RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’sirrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to forcethe enemy into concessions. (Pretty crude, rude and mean, huh? They want tocreate anger and fear.)

* RULE 6: “A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing itwithout urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and willeven suggest better ones. (Radical activists, in this sense, are no differentthat any other human being. We all avoid “un-fun” activities, and but we revelat and enjoy the ones that work and bring results.)

* RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.” Don’t become oldnews. (Even radical activists get bored. So to keep them excited and involved,organizers are constantly coming up with new tactics.)

* RULE 8: “Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keepthe opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit themfrom the flank with something new. (Attack, attack, attack from all sides,never giving the reeling organization a chance to rest, regroup, recover andre-strategize.)

* RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.”Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.(Perception is reality. Large organizations always prepare a worst-casescenario, something that may be furthest from the activists’ minds. The upshotis that the organization will expend enormous time and energy, creating in itsown collective mind the direst of conclusions. The possibilities can easilypoison the mind and result in demoralization.)

* RULE 10: “If you push a negative hard enough, it will push through and becomea positive.” Violence from the other side can win the public to your sidebecause the public sympathizes with the underdog. (Unions used this tactic.Peaceful [albeit loud] demonstrations during the heyday of unions in the earlyto mid-20th Century incurred management’s wrath, often in the form of violencethat eventually brought public sympathy to their side.)

* RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.”Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution tothe problem. (Old saw: If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of theproblem. Activist organizations have an agenda, and their strategy is to hold aplace at the table, to be given a forum to wield their power. So, they have tohave a compromise solution.)

* RULE 12: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Cutoff the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after peopleand not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. (This is cruel, butvery effective. Direct, personalized criticism and ridicule works.)

 

[AcidFlashGordon]

Complete bullshit, yes! Too effin' stupid, I'm afraid not.
He, just as most liberals, spew their ridiculous ideology rhetoric for all the lame stream media to inform and educate the masses. Think of the individuals that cling to this administrations every word and side with it no matter how completely incorrect it is, "over half of our country". For all they know, or even care for that matter is the Tea Party is nothing more than a bunch of disgruntled, red necks who are pissed off they lost the election and hate ovomit because he's black. It has absolutely nothing to do with objective principles or facts what so ever. He's playing the tune for the so termed "low information voter" who knows no better and goes only by what they're told by the barackistanian media companies.

Well, that is true. The

have been at the

for as long, and actually longer, than Obastard has been in office. The 'low information voters' are just what Obastard and his drooling communist/socialist/Marxist minions love and, as you noted, they cultivate them ..... like the vegetables they are (although that IS insulting to all vegetables.....)

 

[Grapenut]

I am not well versed in history, but I will submit to your recollection, whether liberty has been destroyed most often by the licentiousness of the people, or by the tyranny of rulers. I imagine, sir, you will find the balance on the side of tyranny. Happy will you be if you miss the fate of those nations, who, omitting to resist their oppressors, or negligently suffering their liberty to be wrested from them, have groaned under intolerable despotism! Most of the human race are now in this deplorable condition; and those nations who have gone in search of grandeur, power, and splendor, have also fallen a sacrifice, and been the victims of their own folly. While they acquired those visionary blessings, they lost their freedom. Patrick Henry