This is a MUSIC forum. Irrelevant or disrespectful posts/topics will be removed by Admin. Please report any forum spam or inappropriate posts HERE.

All users can post to this forum on general music topics.

Moderators: bandmixmod1, jimmy990, spikedace

#187971 by Drumsinhisheart
Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:29 pm
I will add this. Various researchers have shown Obama lied about his own family history in his own books, which they have also shown were not even written by him.

I believe it can be rightfully stated Obama is a serial liar, maybe pathological in nature. Of course, all politicians lie. To the degree Obama has it just makes him alarmingly good at what he is able to get away with, with Congress being too afraid to be called racists if they challenge him.

As you can see I have no more respect for Congress than I do the Marxist.

#187983 by Drumsinhisheart
Mon Oct 01, 2012 11:45 pm
Benjamin,

I believe your questions are honest ones.

I would ask you one. I will state as matter of fact I was opposed to Obama being POTUS before he was nominated. I am a registered Independent. I would never vote for a democrat simply because it is no longer the party my father supported all his life. It is diametrically opposed to my own convictions of Americanism. I did not vote for John McCain. Same ol, same ol problem group of problem makers growing government to monstrous proportions.

Obama is not a natural born citizen. Courts, right up to the SCOTUS are afraid to address this issue. The Democrat party changed the wording in its paperwork in the submission of Obama's eligibility, which anyone can see when comparing paperwork from before Obama's nomination with his own. Democrats KNOW Obama is not eligible. Eight times in congressional session Democrats tried to create new laws striking down Article 2, Sec1 provisions for natural born status. They know he's a lying felon.

Second, he and Biden were listed as #1 and 2 of the most liberal senators in congress, by an unbiased think tank. The name escapes me, but a simple search would reveal the group that makes up that list.

Third, Obama's family, both sides, were avowed socialists, if not outright, outspoken communists, and Frank Marshall Davis, who Obama considers one of his major mentors, was an avowed Marxist.

Once the campaign began, it was Hillary who first brought up the natural born citizen issue. Her campaign dropped it like a hot potato, and everybody else freaked out when charges of racism began very early if anyone challenged anything about Obama. That spoke volumes to me. Plus the sealing of all his personal records. Spoke volumes.

I would ask you this question. You believe Arpaio's posse was biased. Are YOU biased? Because if you are, all the documentation to answer all your questions is so profuse out there if you want answers you could easily find them. Are THOSE sources biased? May be they are. If bias makes the difference for you, than any facts presented become "biased." Makes no sense for me to take the time to rehearse issues and sources I have read for five years now that anyone can read for themselves. I AM biased against Barack Hussein Obama being POTUS.

You say Arpaio's posse is biased. Have you watched any of the press conferences held by the Posse to plainly show why the birth certificate is forged, along with his selective service card? Is it biased to question how Obama can have a Connecticut social security number? I do not believe it is.

Obama said in his campaign regulations he would instill, if elected, would bring down coal plants and send the cost of electricity sky high. He questioned the integrity of the Constitution. He questioned the integrity, as a professed Christian no less, of those who cling to their guns and their Bibles. He, like all new world order pawns, have no use for the second amendment, and a well armed populace.

He stated point blank all laws his administration signs will FIRST spend a period of review for all citizens to see on the internet before voted upon. That may be the biggest lie of all, especially where Obamacare comes in.

I could do this all night long, but, if you are biased, I would be wasting my time, would I not?

If you believe in big government which can take over private enterprise, reduce American's freedoms and liberties to have insurance or NOT, to nothing then you and I are at opposite ends of the poles.

For five years I have watched this man lie, and carry on Chicago-type politics to get his way and watch a cowardly Congress do nothing to stand up to him. Mostly because they are of the same fabric when all is said and done.

You wake up now or the United States of your parents and grand parents will no longer remain for your children and grand children.

But, if you do not know American history and principles, you will not care. But you will when the federal government's armed agents, allowed nowhere in the constitution, come knocking on your door one day to take you away if you speak out.

That is my deepest conviction. Here I stand, I can do no other.

Ask yourself why Chavez would say he would vote for Obama, and believes Obama would vote for him. Good grief, school children can see this. At least those taught principles of Americanism.

#187984 by PaperDog
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:17 am
Havent you guys learned yet? You can spew numbers and polls all day long... It's meaningless so early in the game. The truth is always different on election day...

#187985 by PaperDog
Tue Oct 02, 2012 12:19 am
Benjamin M Johnson wrote:
Drumsinhisheart wrote:By definition, by personal history, by those chosen for his own administration, by definition, Obama is a Marxist. He believes in redistribution of wealth, which is the simple platform of Marxism.

When has Obama said he believes in redistribution of wealth?

What personal history supports it?

Whom has he chosen for his administration who supports it?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_the_Plumber

#188010 by Kramerguy
Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:53 pm
It's almost as funny as it is sad. Every time one of us "independent thinkers" asks a series of well thought out and potentially informative questions ( as benjamin did above), the responses are almost always reactionary and full of repeated myths - without actually addressing any of the questions, and even when the questions are vaguely addressed, there's no citations of proof, just personal opinions with no factual or rational base.

c'mon people.. think for yourselves, for your own sake.

#188011 by Drumsinhisheart
Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:08 pm
Kramerguy,

I would not consider my answers to Benjamin vague, anymore than I would consider your post vague about me and others stating our thoughts here.

To the issue of information to back up statements made, I asked Benjamin a simple question. Is he biased? If he is, and if his bias is slanted towards support of Obama, there is no reason for me take the time to look up all the source links and post them. He will just see them as "biased."

Anyone here reading this, who has followed this course of reporting and investigation for the last five years knows what I have stated is accurate, based on the sources, and hearing Obama say things himself.

EVERYBODY is biased. Anyone with convictions, anyway. I am very biased against Obama as POTUS. I stated that. If anyone will go to World Net Daily, Drudge Report, The Blaze, Newsmax, Christian Science Monitor, and plenty of other news sites they will see this information, ad infinitem. It isn't hidden in corners. Now, if people feel these sites are "biased," so be it. All news agencies are. Some are just more bold in what they will tackle than others, and how deep they will dig to get to the truth.

BTW, I DO think for myself. I teach people to think for themselves, and have for thirty years of seminars, private studies and discussion. I would not expect, nor want anyone to believe anything just because I or anyone else stated it. Especially info on the web. People need to educate themselves if they want to know the truth about anything.
Last edited by Drumsinhisheart on Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

#188015 by Kramerguy
Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:25 pm
Drumsinhisheart wrote:Kramerguy,

I would not consider my answers to Benjamin vague, anymore than I would consider your post vague about me and others stating our thoughts here.

To the issue of information to back up statements made, I asked Benjamin a simple question. Is he biased? If he is, and if his bias is slanted towards support of Obama, there is no reason for me take the time to look up all the source links and post them. He will just see them as "biased."

Anyone here reading this, who has followed this course of reporting and investigation for the last five years knows what I have stated is accurate, based on the sources, and hearing Obama say things himself.

EVERYBODY is biased. Anyone with convictions, anyway. I am very biased against Obama as POTUS. I stated that. If anyone will go to World Net Daily, Drudge Report, The Blaze, Newsmax, Christian Science Monitor, and plenty of other news sites they will see this information, ad infinitem. It isn't hidden in corners. Now, if people feel these sites are "biased," so be it. All news agencies are. Some are just more bold in what they will tackle than others, and how deep they will dig to get to the truth.


I would agree with most that those sites are biased. I'd still read an article from them, and if I disagreed or saw misleading or non-facts presented, I'd provide my reasoning and citations as to why. I have stated in the long forum post by vampier about the sites I use and why I use them, and would be happy to debate honestly about anything really. I think benjamin asked some really good questions and I believe you have an opportunity to engage the subject a lot deeper by answering them - and go ahead and use the sites you use- and expect me or benjamin to come back with further debate on the veracity of the statements.

Eventually the truth will rear it's ugly head for all to see, if we are any good at some real and honest debate.

I've managed the incredible feat of changing my mind on many topics over the years through thoughtful debate. I'd like to believe I'm not the only one in the world who can accomplish that.

And I agree totally that we ALL have our biases. The difference to me is that with myself- they are NOT beliefs.. like they said in "dogma"- you can change ideas, but beliefs... it's much harder to change a persons' beliefs.

I don't really believe in anything, but I have a lot of ideas :)

#188018 by Drumsinhisheart
Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:43 pm
"When has Obama said he believes in redistribution of wealth?"

When campaigning Obama encountered "Joe the Plummer." Paper Dog included a link. The conversation between the two was plastered all over the place catching Obama stating he wants to see the wealth spread around. First, it is not the responsibility of the Federal government to spread wealth around. The Constitution requires the federal government to stay within very close boundaries well stated. Distribution of wealth is not within those boundaries. Second, the Federal government is not some Robin Hood. It has no authority to require more money from the wealthy, than the poor. That is a philosophical judgment call not given to politicians in the Constitution. It is not given the job of being philanthropic with American's money.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsapJii1rMY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvGsWQ69Tzk

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge3aGJfDSg4

I state categorically that Barack Obama is a Marxist, because he espouses policies of Marxism.

It is criminal in the eyes of millions to forcibly take money from those who earn it and give it to those who do not. That is the work of various beneficent societies in America, based on free-will contributions, NOT the job of the Federal government through forced taxation.

Those who believe it is right for government to do this are not Americans in the sense of historic Americanism. THAT, to me, is what this entire discussion is about - PERSONAL responsibility, accountability, production, and liberty to pursue happiness as the individual sees fit, within parameters of sound, Constitutional civil law.

And Kramerguy I want to post this statement again, because I edited in to a previous post and you missed it,

"BTW, I DO think for myself. I teach people to think for themselves, and have for thirty years of seminars, private studies and discussion. I would not expect, nor want anyone to believe anything just because I or anyone else stated it. Especially info on the web. People need to educate themselves if they want to know the truth about anything."

#188020 by Drumsinhisheart
Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:06 pm
Put simply, every question asked by Benjamin finds quick answers with simple searches on a search engine, first page.

Truly, saying that people like myself give vague answers to questions is quite unfair, seeing the info is so readily available to anyone wanting to know the answers to their questions.

#188024 by Drumsinhisheart
Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:30 pm
Does Obama feel he is above the law, and Constitutional limitations? After 139 presidential orders I see no reason to doubt that. But, consider this small episode in current news:

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government ... reelection

#188026 by Kramerguy
Tue Oct 02, 2012 4:14 pm
Drums-

I apologize for labeling you as vague in your responses. I re-read them and was mistaken in my original assessment.

I don't believe Obama to be a Marxist, although I have not watched the videos (yet). It will take some time and I'm at work today, but I will do my best to address them and comment appropriately in the near future.

That being said, I do believe Obama to be a socialist, and I don't believe socialism itself is a bad thing at all. Our country was built on socialist ideals, everything from schools, roads, police/fire, national state and local parks, weather services, NASA, you name it. We wouldn't be where we are today without socialism.

Companies like AT&T, Exxon, and Monsanto wouldn't exist if not for public roads to conduct their business on. Social policies combined with capitalist economics and Democratic ideals combined in this country to make it strong, and social establishments such as unions and co-ops have helped create what was once the strongest middle class of any country in the world.

I firmly believe (all opinion by the way) that our conservative leanings in the last 20 years combined with greed and apathy have gutted our middle class and left many in poverty and ruin; that we need now, more than ever, a social agenda and government infrastructures, while at the same time allowing good businesses to flourish. We need to tax appropriately, flat rate for all, not this nonsense where wealthy people pay 1/3 rates on capital gains and beat out codes with loopholes.

Again, I will respond when I can on the videos. I'm really not up to speed on some of the subject matter and will need to do my own homework in addition.

#188028 by Drumsinhisheart
Tue Oct 02, 2012 6:08 pm
Perhaps a definition of socialism is needed here, because I do not see that policy employed in early American history.

http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/ ... ialism.php

That is the world socialist website. I believe it contains a philosophy diametrically opposed to a Constitutional Republic, which is what America is.

I do NOT want everything held in common ownership by everybody, which means government ultimately controls it.

I do NOT want politicians of any stripe in control of ANYTHING other than what the Constitution allows. They wreck whatever they touch.

I do NOT want to live in a Democracy - majority rule - which the Founders knew was little more than mob rule, and there always follows persecution of minorities when majorities have the final say. I want to live under the rule of law, as defined by the US Constitution.

I do NOT want to live in a global community controlled by a "Democratic" majority deciding what I need in life.

There has never been a truly "conservative" government in America in the 20th century. Reagan attempted to implement limited government ideas and was overturned by a Democrat controlled congress, which has gotten more and more liberal, progressive, socialistic, fascist, whatever you want to call, every decade of the last 100 years. RINOs have traitorously followed suit.

Nothing has been done in American history according to socialistic principles. That is erroneous. Roads were paid for, money given to free capitalist companies to build them. Many have challenged, on Constitutional principles, whether the federal government has any business entering the "space race." It did so in response to Soviet activities. Private enterprise would have gotten man into space and to the moon much more quickly than government controlled NASA had done.

The incentive to gain, to produce wealth, to better oneself will always be a more productive society than socialism, which has failed in every country it has been attempted in. Where China has succeeded it has done so at the expense of multiplied millions, now hundreds of millions, who have no freedoms or liberty or pursuit of happiness as they see fit.

God forbid America becomes a socialist nation. Progressives have already ruined enough of the American dream. If Obama gets another term he will do all he can to finish the job, and America will turn into Greece, into Spain, into riots, chaos, and military on the streets of every city in America.

No. I want no socialism in my country. I want red, white, and blue, not red and yellow.

#188100 by Kramerguy
Wed Oct 03, 2012 12:18 pm
Drumsinhisheart wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsapJii1rMY


Ok, this is a radio excerpt where it starts seemingly while Obama is mid-sentence and is quoted "The supreme court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth", to which he then goes on to speak about the civil rights movement's failure to address the issue or redistribution of "power". I don't see how this is the 'smoking gun' evidence that Obama wants to redistribute everyone's wealth.

It's seemingly out of context, considering a simple explanation of the quote above could be that he was asked a simple question regarding the supreme court and redistribution, where it's common practice during an interview for the person being interviewed to repeat parts of the question in the answer.

Drumsinhisheart wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cvGsWQ69Tzk


Clearly a reference to raising taxes on the wealthier classes to help lower classes have the ability to persue an education. It's no secret that the government used to grant a LOT of money towards college education, keeping tuition rates in check and federal loans available. The irony here is that you effectively pointed out a different serious flaw with Obama, which is that since he took office, that part of government assistance has been severely gutted and the wealthy, including himself, have had no tax increases whatsoever. So I will give you this: he failed in policy, even lied, but no marxism here. Socialism, maybe. But I'm okay with that.

Drumsinhisheart wrote:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ge3aGJfDSg4


"I believe in redistribution". He never said "of wealth" because he wasn't talking about wealth, he was talking about government resources, social programs, safety nets.

I'm sure you will disagree with me, but honestly- it seems like if you want to read between the lines and assume things, then you can easily make it out to be whatever you want, but sticking to what he actually said, and trying to nail down the context that he said it in leads to different conclusions logically.

That two of the three excerpts are spliced mid-paragraph doesn't help the arguments.

I remember a lot of those speeches that Obama gave back then. He was talking mostly about how government $$ at that time had been diverted into special funds, and often pillaged, while taking away from social benefit programs.

I strongly believe he was full of sh*t and telling everyone what they wanted to hear, but I also strongly believe that a government that reinvests in ALL it's citizens in the areas of public education, job training, and safety nets will ultimately become a strong nation than the alternative, which is what we have now- 30Mil+ people who can't get their heads above water.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests