BF2S Forums Drooling Leftist Idiot Spewing Hate as Obama Laughs

Socialism for the rich

That's fucking great.

Now we casually wish death on those we disagree with politically. Okay, fair enough. But what happens when public figures begin joking about this is that the seed in crazy peoples mind is planted. I can guarantee you blood will run in the streets if this type of thinking becomes the majority sentiment.

People don't fucking get it, through bushes presidency the left accused him of many things, from politicians to pundits, of everything from staging 9-11 to psychological issues with regards to his father and iraq. democrat senators labeled charges of treason and other various high crimes against a standing president, and then funded the war and approved the torture.

Rush Limbaugh has done nothing but explain his view that obama is on a major power grab. He has explained the causes leading up to the financial meltdown and exposed the hypocrisy of the left blaming it all on bush. His overall point is that this is a backhanded introduction of socialism, but the sort that leaves the select few elite in ever greater positions of power. He never once said he wanted America to fail. He said he wanted obamas agenda to fail, and for this he is branded with hate speech.

Randy Roads of Air America seriously suggested that Cheney would arrange public executions in stadiums. She has suggested that somebody take George Bush out on a boat and shoot him, and what happens? She is a liberal darling.


The fact is, liberals are branding dissent as treason. They are saying that wanting obama to fail politically is on par with the Death To America diatribes Osama Bin Laden gives periodically. This is insanity.
Meanwhile, the obama admin is putting his hands into all sorts of public companies. They are forcing some companies that do not want bailout funds to take them.

Fringe crackpot groups are beginning to sound off, here is a sample;

    STATE OF OKLAHOMA
    2nd Session of the 51st Legislature (2008)
    HOUSE JOINT
    RESOLUTION 1089 By: Key
    AS INTRODUCED
    A Joint Resolution claiming sovereignty under the
    Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United
    States over certain powers; serving notice to the
    federal government to cease and desist certain
    mandates; and directing distribution.
    WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United
    States reads as follows:
    “The powers not delegated to the United States by the
    Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to
    the States respectively, or to the people.”; and
    WHEREAS, the Tenth Amendment defines the total scope of federal
    power as being that specifically granted by the Constitution of the
    United States and no more; and
    WHEREAS, the scope of power defined by the Tenth Amendment means
    that the federal government was created by the states specifically
    to be an agent of the states; and

    WHEREAS, today, in 2008, the states are demonstrably treated as
    agents of the federal government; and
    WHEREAS, many federal mandates are directly in violation of the
    Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States; and
    WHEREAS, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in New York
    v. United States, 112 S. Ct. 2408 (1992), that Congress may not
    simply commandeer the legislative and regulatory processes of the
    states; and
    WHEREAS, a number of proposals from previous administrations and
    some now pending from the present administration and from Congress
    may further violate the Constitution of the United States.
    NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
    AND THE SENATE OF THE 2ND SESSION OF THE 51ST OKLAHOMA LEGISLATURE:
    THAT the State of Oklahoma hereby claims sovereignty under the
    Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States over all
    powers not otherwise enumerated and granted to the federal
    government by the Constitution of the United States.
    THAT this serve as Notice and Demand to the federal government,
    as our agent, to cease and desist, effective immediately, mandates
    that are beyond the scope of these constitutionally delegated
    powers.
    THAT a copy of this resolution be distributed to the President
    of the United States, the President of the United States Senate, the
    Speaker of the United States House of Representatives, the Speaker

    of the House and the President of the Senate of each state’s
    legislature of the United States of America, and each member of the
    Oklahoma Congressional Delegation.


It seems some people in this country are hell bent on internal war.

No, it's about branding political disagreement as treason.

That's what they do.

Before your sensibilities get in a knot and you have to go to the doctor to get it untied before your kidneys fail. this is the same "correspondence dinner" that brought you this



Everyone was laughing and it was pretty funny too. Limbaugh the 20th hijacker missed the plane because of too much Oxycontin. lolz. The speaker, she even comments "too much!?" and that says it all, ridiculous comedy. Just like "whitey mc" in the video mocking rap. Completely over the top.

BTW the whole patriotism/treason lingo cuts both ways, the right is all too happy to swing the blade but when it swings back around and cuts their nuts off they cry like little babies. I still remember the call to patriotism, he's our president now and we're at war, everyone needs to get behind the president, put on your flag pin and fall in line. /sarcasm. and if you demonstrate for peace then you're not "supporting the troops" and a traitor. Right wing chant "9/11, 9/11, support the troops, support the troops."

PS, If I were Obama I would be keeping a close eye on the far right for assassination chatter because that would be treason.

ATG wrote:

No, it's about branding political disagreement as treason.

That's what they do.

Wait...isn't that what Conservatives have been doing for the last 8 years?

imortal wrote:

Wreckognize wrote:

ATG wrote:

No, it's about branding political disagreement as treason.

That's what they do.

Wait...isn't that what Conservatives have been doing for the last 8 years?

No, rabid right wingers (I am not quite rabid) said it was 'unpatriaotic.'  They did not call it treason.

Now, meeting with the political leaders of a nation in military conflict with the United States without the consent of the US government while a reserve officer with the US military... that may be viewed as treason by some.   (John Kerry, for those who care or remember, but memories are short)

Didn't Reagan/Bush send people to negotiate with Iran to delay the return of the hostages until after the 1980 presidential so that Reagan would win??? If true, wouldn't that be viewed as treason by some?

Patriotism and politics are strange bed fellows.

imortal wrote:

Diesel_dyk wrote:

imortal wrote:

No, rabid right wingers (I am not quite rabid) said it was 'unpatriaotic.'  They did not call it treason.

Now, meeting with the political leaders of a nation in military conflict with the United States without the consent of the US government while a reserve officer with the US military... that may be viewed as treason by some.   (John Kerry, for those who care or remember, but memories are short)

Didn't Reagan/Bush send people to negotiate with Iran to delay the return of the hostages until after the 1980 presidential so that Reagan would win??? If true, wouldn't that be viewed as treason by some?

Patriotism and politics are strange bed fellows.

If true, yes, that is pretty bad.  However, they were not members of the military, held to the UCMJ at the time, but pretty bad.  Didn't Obama go to Iraq during the race?  But note I did specify that Kerry was still in the military (albeit the reserves) when he went to Paris to meet with the North Vietnamese officials.

He wasn't military but don't forget that George H Bush was director of CIA in 1977. So there would have been the same or higher obligations on him as if he were military. He was brought in by Ford and served under Carter for a short time.

Cybargs wrote:

Socialism for the rich

as opposed to Capitalism for the rich?

As I recall, the left wanted wanted the Bush administration to fail. Oops, sorry, just the Bush administration's policies. So why should this be any different?

AussieReaper wrote:

BN wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Socialism for the rich

as opposed to Capitalism for the rich?

No, Capitalism is clearly for the poor... to be pissed on.

Capitalism is bad...lmao...  If it wasn't for hardworking people who make a lot of money... their would be no tax money for all the pissed on poor people...  and 1 man getting rich doesn't  result in another man getting poor because of it... I have heard that argument recently and it cracks me up...
   If you are poor... get a job and work 7 days a week and 12 hours a day... soon enough you will be wealthy also...(unless something happens like a catastrophe or the economy is bad)   in other words... work hard and you will make money... your results will vary... (if you cant work... there are programs in place to take care of you...the programs wont make you rich...but you can't really expect too much...)
  I am not rich...and i don't blame the rich for being rich...

Last edited by [TUF]Catbox (2009-05-10 18:05:04)

Wanda Sykes is a lesbian.

Lol she was making people laugh, it's her job. Limbaugh is a commentator, that's his job.

Seriously this isn't even an issue, its just an excuse for people to get offended.