Did you care when it mattered most?

1. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 10 years ago

   I'm sick of hearing that liberals don't care about the erosion of our civil liberties "now that Obama is doing it."  I have a good memory, folks.  And I remember VERY CLEARLY that liberals were the the vocal opponents of the Patriot Act BEFORE it was enacted.  I remember VERY CLEARLY that the Patriot Act had widespread conservative support.  I remember VERY CLEARLY that liberals who opposed the Patriot Act, not to mention the invasion of Iraq, were painted as unpatriotic, traitorous even.
   
   So, don't give me that $h|t!  I'm not buying it.  Where were you when it mattered?

   replyreport
   1. 56

      Education Answerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I'm a republican. I was opposed to it under President Bush, and I'm opposed to it under President Obama.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Isn't it interesting!  The vanishing Bush supporter.  They used to be so vocal and adamant in their support of GWB's policies, including warrantless wire tapping, data mining, torture, airport searches, and the invasion of Iraq. 
         
         Now, I find it fascinating that the Bush supporter of those days seems to have vanished!  They seem to have never existed!  Where did they all go?
         
         It's one of those things that makes me go "Hmmmmmm........"
         
         Are you out there, former Bush supporter?  Anyone?
         
         LOL

         replyreport
         1. 56

            Education Answerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            No, I supported much, but not all, of what Bush did.  I'd take him any day over Obama.  Heck, I don't even support all of what Reagan did.

            replyreport
            1. 86

               Zelkiiroposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               You'd pretty much be evil if you did.

               replyreport
               1. 56

                  Education Answerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  Compared to Obama, yeah right.  LOL

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     Brenda Durhamposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                     No kidding!
                     
                     
                     If Reagan's ideology was evil, then Obama's is waaaay past Abomination.

                     replyreport
                     1. 56

                        Education Answerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                        In this case, it's Obamanation, but it means the same as abomination.

                        replyreport
                        1. 86

                           Zelkiiroposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                           Just because it sounds the same doesn't mean it means the same thing. This is called a "homophone" in the English language.
                           
                           In Japanese, abomination is "imubeki" while Obamanation is "Obama no kuni." If it can't cross the language barrier, then its correlation is meaningless.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              PrettyPantherposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                              

                              replyreport
                           2. 56

                              Education Answerposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                              If it means the same thing, it's called a "synonym."  Did I strike a nerve?  In the English language, it's called humor.

                              replyreport
         2. 51

            Lie Detectorposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            "Are you out there, former Bush supporter?  Anyone?"
            
            Yep.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Brenda Durhamposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               Me too.

               replyreport
   2. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I was there, trusting our leaders.   Because they were trustworthy and patriotic, just doing the jobs that somebody had to do.
      Now our leaders are not trustworthy.
      Shouldn't put power in the hands of people who trash the Constitution.
      There's another reason too-------it may be possible to trust the FBI, CIA, NSA, etc.    So, as long as they're not corrupted by the greed and bias coming from the Constitution-trashing White House Administration and the IRS etc.,  then the legislation is viable.
      Problem is, we don't know who we can even trust anymore.
      We just know they don't reside in the White House.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         PrettyPantherposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         [Shaking head]
         
         This is a perfect illustration of what I am saying in my OP.  Thank you for demonstrating my point.  I think.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Brenda Durhamposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            It's a statement about the reason people don't trust certain people to implement laws.
            Very simple, very honest, very correct. 
            Beats me as to why you don't get it.
            
            If you had to have someone protect you from criminals, who would you give the power to?------someone you know and trust and who loves you,  or a stranger with unclear loyalties and motive?
            It's that simple.
            
            It's not about the Patriot Act as much as it's about who wields the power to enact it.
            A gun is just a gun until it's placed in somebody's hand;  then it's either a killer or a protector, depending on which person has it.

            replyreport
            1. 86

               Zelkiiroposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               Until guns launch shields, it will never be a tool of protection. It is only a tool for killing or maiming.

               replyreport
               1. 0

                  Brenda Durhamposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                  Wrong.
                  In the right hands, guns are for protection.   Just like they've always been. When I was a kid,  I personally was saved from a rattlesnake by my brother who shot the snake.   And there are many many witnesses for guns being instrumental in saving lives and protecting people and homes.
                  
                  But please note that I was using the reference to guns simply as an example of that concept (of who we can trust and who we cannot).
                  I wasn't trying to take this thread off onto a tangent like gun control, etc.

                  replyreport
                  1. 86

                     Zelkiiroposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                     That snake sure sounds like he was protected.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Brenda Durhamposted 10 years agoin reply to this

                        Eh....what do you mean?

                        replyreport
            2. 0

               PrettyPantherposted 10 years agoin reply to this

               So, you like the Patriot Act, but only if your guy is in office.
               
               Again, proving my point.

               replyreport
2. 66

   innersmiffposted 10 years ago

   Seriously, who cares? Let's just come together and do something about it. Get rid of Obama and put in someone who isn't a Democrat or Republican. How about it?

   replyreport
   1. 0

      PrettyPantherposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      I would love to put in someone who could truly effect change.  In my opinion, change will have to come from the ground up, not from the top down.  I don't have any answers on how to help create a groundswell of support for that to happen.
      
      As far as "seriously, who cares?" I believe it IS important to point out that many of the same people who are grumbling now were on the bandwagon to sacrifice our civil liberties in the name of terrorism,  Get THEM out of office, whether they were Democrats or Republicans, liberals or conservatives.

      replyreport
      1. 94

         wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         If the giant boondoggle of Obamacare - the single largest step towards socialism this country has ever taken - isn't change, I'm not at all sure I want to see what you would call "change".

         replyreport
         1. 0

            PrettyPantherposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            Obamacare is the single largest step towards socialism?  Really?  I thought it was a boon for private insurance companies.  Goes to show you how differently people can view the same thing.
            
            As for change, I'd like to see money taken out of politics, a huge cut in the defense budget, and single-payer health care. 
            
            That's just for starters. 

            replyreport
         2. 84

            gmwilliamsposted 10 years agoin reply to this

            THANK YOU!  Wilderness, it is change-for THE VERY WORST.  Smart and aware people are seeing President Obama for what HE is.  He has extended the Patriot Act.  He indicated that he would stop wars yet he has invaded Syria.  He also had IRS spy on conservatives and people who disagree with him.
            
            Dr. Ben Carson asserted that after his speech at President Obama breakfast, he was visited by the IRS as a result of his political views.  Then, ooops, there is Benghazi.  What Bush has done is VERY, VERY MINOR in comparison to what President Obama is doing to this country.  Freedoms are being eroded each day; however, the gullible refuse to acknowledge this fact. 
            
            There is a DOUBLE STANDARD here indeed.  Bush was condemned when he instituted the Patriot Act and invaded Iraq in addition to indulging in unethical business practices.  However, when Obama did similar things, very little is said and if there is criticism, it is swept under the rug.   Obama, to many pundits, seem to do NO WRONG while Bush was WIDELY condemned for doing similar things. Hmmmm, what is good for the goose and not good for the gander it seems.

            replyreport
   2. 94

      wildernessposted 10 years agoin reply to this

      Now that seems to be a problem.  Put a (D) after a name and the conservatives aren't interested in anything that stupid liberal has to say - might as well keep his mouth shut.  And vice-versa - an (R) means any self respecting liberal will be reaching for the earplugs as soon as the mouth opens to speak.
      
      At least judging by the vitriol in these forums...

      replyreport
      1. 84

         gmwilliamsposted 10 years agoin reply to this

         Correct, instead of vitriol, substitute VENOM..............

         replyreport
3. 0

   PrettyPantherposted 10 years ago

   By the way, when I say "where were you when it mattered?" I'm asking people to pay attention and speak up BEFORE this stuff occurs and stop defending their "side" even when they are wrong.

   replyreport