well, IM still waiting to learn who we are 'not allowed' to criticize?


congressionally speaking,,,,or legally

this very forum seems evidence that everyone and everything can be criticized, and others can react ,,,, as long as they don't do physical harm, steal, or murder,,,

Are the animals in a zoo free?

Au contraire, Congress should have many more days off, albeit the Federalist Papers, No. 84 by Hamilton:

"Let us now see what there is to counterbalance any extra expense that may attend the establishment of the proposed government. The first thing which presents itself is that a great part of the business which now keeps Congress sitting through the year will be transacted by the President. Even the management of foreign negotiations will naturally devolve upon him, according to general principles concerted with the Senate, and subject to their final concurrence. Hence it is evident that a portion of the year will suffice for the session of both the Senate and the House of Representatives; we may suppose about a fourth for the latter and a third, or perhaps half, for the former. The extra business of treaties and appointments may give this extra occupation to the Senate. From this circumstance we may infer that, until the House of Representatives shall be increased greatly beyond its present number, there will be a considerable saving of expense from the difference between the constant session of the present and the temporary session of the future Congress."

Let's hope he takes more vacation time. How about a permanent one?

You mean like in San Quinton permanent or hanging at high noon on the white house lawn?

He will undoubtedly be the worst president in our history.
Just leave would be enough.

Aah, but that is the problem, no accountability for their actions. They do are their masters dictate then they enjoy a tremendous life on your nickle.

Time to collect on accountability, not just Odumbo but many others also.

I agree, but that's not gonna happen.

"��We can state with conviction, therefore, that a man's support for absolute government is in direct proportion to the contempt he feels for his country."
-Alexis de Tocqueville

i guess you forget that there is only one president at a time... why would we criticize a past president now? is bush in charge? is clinton making decisions now?

he's a bad president and he should be called out on it, just like Bush was when he was in office...

there is a difference from saying, BEtty is the worst liar ever, and betty is a liar, or betty lied

the COMPETITION aspect is the inconsistent part of it that pretends or implies hat a SINGLE person is SUDDENLY doing things that are UNIQUELY Terrible


that I why I put up the quote about Linocln,, similarly hated in his time, but still historically seen as a great man in a time of great and historical accomplishment

and why I also put up the qote from the fictitious president stating that whats POPULAR Is not always whats right,, history remembers based upon people doing the right thing, not based upon how popular that thing was at the time,,,

yea, just like bush will the the best prez ever...

i don't see king barry doing anything right, and i think think the present and the future are more important than the past...

if barry wants my respect, he can start doing away with the terrible programs bush started... like the patriot act for starters..

I don't see BUsh being the best or the worst,, most likely in the middle since the economy ended under him so much worse than where it began, and we ended up in more wars than when he began, it would be hard to be 'the best'

but war nor recession are unique to his presidency , making it hard to be 'the worst' historians may learn more though,, who knows


As far as Obama, as you said the present and the future matter and he still has three years worth of time to make more accomplishments or mistakes, but

I see healthcare reform being a HUGE improvement as it evolves, and being in fewer wars at the end of his term than the beginning, and the economy being better, and bin laden and alqueda being takendown/weakened,,,,,make it unlikey history will rate Obama 'the worst'

however, recovery from recession, and military wars/invasions/retreats are not so unique to a presidency that OBama would earn 'the best' (yet)

historically speaking, his not so unique things may still be seen as more unique having done them with the laziest/most defiant congress (most do nothing) in US history,,,,
and the beginning of a new healthcare system may put him amongst the top,,,,like the beginning of civil rights, the ending of slavery, or the beginning of soc sec or medicare did for the presidents residing in those eras

healthcare means nothing, just more money for us to spend...Nothing was proven that he did anything to bin laden, being a nice burial at sea and no body... and he's giving al quida weapons now, so your right, they're happy for now...

and so much for a "more" transparent goverment, there is more spying and invasion of privacy more than ever now...

and the only change i see is for the worse...

opinions are opinions, but don't let any facts get in your way while forming them...

No POTUS in history ever thought it was acceptable to kill American citizens without due process.....until Obozo.... and he starts with a 17 year old boy and his friends at a BBQ.

Using past presidents and their policies to measure the qualities of a present one is like comparing one deadly cancer to another. Since the beginning of media their money masters have decided long before any election what our "choices" will be, giving us our choice of cancers, but never a cure.

You can't honestly look at the condition of the world today and believe money in politics and a corrupt 2 party system is actually working unless your head is buried in the sand or up another dark location of the human anatomy.

wait are you implying the navy seals would actually take part in LYING? you don't deserve the freedoms our soldiers fight for ....lol

just kidding

well yeah,, people will believe whatever 'facts' they choose to,, if they haven't seen it for themselves, I guess any of those 'facts' can be argued to be just lies someone told...huh?

it works , except for those who don't think it works the way they want it to

I think that this time is no different than any other in its imperfections and its struggles,,,,,,they have always been a part of American history, just like they are a part of life

its all a matter of perspective,, there are a million things that we can look at as individuals about life and what is 'better' or 'worse'

we have ALWAYS Had things we needed to work on, but life has gone on through all of it, as it will now

I don't see the end of the world urgency about things happening today, that others do,, I don't think its any WORSE now than it has been in the past in terms of survivability ,,,,,,

I Just think, perhaps naturally, people are more likely to see something as urgent when it affects THEM personally, but , to me, nothing happening today is new, nothing happening today is unsurvivable,,,

'due process' is determined by the culture,,,,

there is a whole thread here that magnifies how important 'due process' is supported by many,, once they decide someone is a criminal of some sort,, especially a political one

That is the biggest crock of whale manure I have heard for an excuse of the manipulation of gov't by a corrupt elite bunch of bankers and corporations ruining our nation. With the help of their propaganda machine (which you seem to buy into), and the influence of money and privilege in politics, they have stolen the rights and power of the people.

It didn't happen over night. So to say it is "no different", or a "natural progression", with no urgent need for worry, my question would be when do you worry, after it's too late? That's like a doctor telling you that you have cancer, but not worrying about it until you are terminal and dying. That's foolish and irresponsible, and simply shows ones stupidity.

And due process.... is not determined by the culture, it's the law! But then you have said before you don't care much for the principals our nation was founded on, or the documents that don't give us our rights, but guarantee them to be unalienable by the corrupt body we call gov't.

You defend Obozocare as the law stating it must be followed, but consider due process, one of our oldest "guaranteed" rights, as something that can be ignored or denied by our sitting wannabe king, along with our other rights, which are also protected under the law.

You can't have it both ways, whether this POTUS, or you, think it might be fitting at the moment to your agenda.

The American system is not a democracy. It is a constitutional republic. A democracy, if you attach meaning to terms, is a system of unlimited majority rule; the classic example is ancient Athens. And the symbol of it is the fate of Socrates, who was put to death legally, because the majority didn't like what he was saying, although he had initiated no force and had violated no one's rights.

Democracy, in short, is a form of collectivism, which denies individual rights: the majority can do whatever it wants with no restrictions. In principle, the democratic government is all-powerful. Democracy is a totalitarian manifestation; it is not a form of freedom . . . .

The American system is a constitutionally limited republic, restricted to the protection of individual rights. In such a system, majority rule is applicable only to lesser details, such as the selection of certain personnel. But the majority has no say over the basic principles governing the government. It has no power to ask for or gain the infringement of individual rights.



Leonard Peikoff,
The Philosophy of Objectivism lecture series, Lecture 9


If we discard morality and substitute for it the Collectivist doctrine of unlimited majority rule, if we accept the idea that a majority may do anything it pleases, and that anything done by a majority is right because it's done by a majority (this being the only standard of right and wrong)how are men to apply this in practice to their actual lives? Who is the majority? In relation to each particular man, all other men are potential members of that majority which may destroy him at its pleasure at any moment. Then each man and all men become enemies; each has to fear and suspect all; each must try to rob and murder first, before he is robbed and murdered.



Textbook of Americanism
The Ayn Rand Column, 8