I charge openly that he will, if possible, take any course opened by anarchy to seize power permanently. I cry tryant.
I think charging a President with tryanny rises above the level of snide comments.
But perhaps you'd like a quote by someone still breathing.
"As far as this Occupy Wall Street movement goes, you know I see it sort of like a Paris mob, I see the presidents rhetoric of envy inflaming the public.
Rand Paul
We could discuss Obama's threats to "take it to the American people", made repeatedly over the past year in the backdrop of serious economic distress. Any thinking person knows that the Chief Executive's primary responsibility is to protect the people and yet here he is deliberately provoking unrest at a time when unrest must necessarily lead to violence. And it will and the blood will be on his hands.
He does this for his political future; he has been clear that he proposed his so-called jobs bill for the express purpose and aim to give him a political point to run on. He is intentionally sowing dissention.
If you want a solution give up the coffee and have some Tea. Krugman put his seal of approval on the Mob today in a witless column in which he blamed the credit crisis on bank's reckless lending. Totally peddling ignorance and I pray you see through it.
It was the Congress that forced the banks to lend recklessly by law and by operation of Fannie and Freddy and the Fed that fed the bubble. The liberals have blown up the country and now eagerly look to the mob to mop up the survivors.
I wonder if Obama will enforce a no fly zone over New York when things get out of hand? Perhaps a few cruise missiles? God save us if the mob realizes that no restraining political power exists above the local level.
the problem with most liberal americans is that they're too kind, patient and intelligent to engage in empty rhetoric in the proper battle form. they are missing that sort of electrifying zeal to deal with demagoguery effectively head on. and usually they end up being the ones bullied.
so it's a big surprise to me that the OWS movement is gaining traction. whatever made these little, docile and innocent sheep move from the flock and turn into wolves must be really that bad and evil. my prediction, in keeping with OP's forecasting, the OWS will get even bigger. even bigger than the Tea Party ever was and ever will be.
You could extend this line of reasoning to any desire for change being unworthy if it isn't aimed at helping the absolute worst off in the world. But it's hard to convince some guy with no job and a family to feed that he should be protesting greater injustices in a country thousands of miles away instead of the lesser ones at home that are affecting him and his loved ones.The problem to me is that I can't really find myself belonging to the OWS movement. Since most grievances are American-Centric, and has almost nothing to do with the plight of their fellow human being across the globe, that are suffering way much worse.
Since when does large protest = death and destruction? The OWS protests are still substantially smaller than the biggest Tea Party events. If this is chaos, what was last summer...Kabul?
He's not provoking anything. He's hoping that a public grass roots movement will get Congress off it's useless ass. And he isn't sowing nearly as much dissension as the class warriors in the Republican leadership.
Way cool! I want to be a Class Warrior in the Republican Leadership! I think you've coined a new term. Or did you just mean class enemy (Communist phrase)?
In any case, the movement picked a bad time to start. Soon it'll be cold and snowy and they'll stay indoors.
Summer wouldn't have been much better. 90 degree days are as bad as the cold and snow.
Really? Where are you from, Manitoba?
I'm a fellow Ohioan actually.
Look at it this way, if it's cold you can always put on more layers, but if it's hot you can only take off so much before you're naked. Standing around in large groups in the middle of the city on a really hot day would be terrible and would surely hurt turnout. The only more optimum time to do a protest like this would be in spring.
Also you do have to remember it's been going on for almost a month now, so they pretty much started at the beginning of Autumn. I wouldn't say their timing was bad at all.
Way cool! I want to be a Class Warrior in the Republican Leadership! I think you've coined a new term. Or did you just mean class enemy (Communist phrase)?
I think you make a good point there. I would like to see an international movement, where many people who are unemployed, or having low wages to collaborate with one another without any hint of nationalistic pride getting in the way.You could extend this line of reasoning to any desire for change being unworthy if it isn't aimed at helping the absolute worst off in the world. But it's hard to convince some guy with no job and a family to feed that he should be protesting greater injustices in a country thousands of miles away instead of the lesser ones at home that are affecting him and his loved ones.
Way cool! I want to be a Class Warrior in the Republican Leadership! I think you've coined a new term. Or did you just mean class enemy (Communist phrase)?
In any case, the movement picked a bad time to start. Soon it'll be cold and snowy and they'll stay indoors.
Your attempt at sarcasm fails the reality test. The only class warfare that has ever existed in the US has been the top against the middle and bottom. To pretend otherwise is just demagoguery.
I'll bet you a 2002 Ohio commemorative quarter that this all dries up after the first big freeze.
In the current American rhetorical climate? I'd say that it barely reaches that level...I think charging a President with tryanny rises above the level of snide comments.
Posing the working majority as helpless victims of bourgeois tyranny does them few favours. Just because they're in retreat now doesn't mean that they always have been, or always will be.Your attempt at sarcasm fails the reality test. The only class warfare that has ever existed in the US has been the top against the middle and bottom. To pretend otherwise is just demagoguery.
I was only attempting irony, and I thought you really did intend to say "class enemy". Otherwise "warriors" doesn't really make much sense. And it would seem natural that since it was at your expense, you wouldn't find it funny.
I believe that we should consider ourselves fortunate that we have so little class warfare in America. The occupiers certainly have the right to protest, and we others have the right to ignore them.
Posing the working majority as helpless victims of bourgeois tyranny does them few favours. Just because they're in retreat now doesn't mean that they always have been, or always will be.