Do you have any specific commentary on that article you’d like to discuss or are you just sharing pablum to stir the pot?
Is there even a specific article you want to discuss? That link only goes to posts made on the blog in 2008.
Well the top post at the link predicts that if Obama got the “Freedom of Choice Act” (FOCA) passed, there would be a civil war. That turned out to be a big fat nothing …
Also, this really doesn’t belong in Popular Media.
I didn’t bother reading that. Obama changed our nation by simply standing up as a person of color, taking the Oath of Office, and serving 2 terms without being assassinated or otherwise forced from office or having a civil war break out. If he’d done nothing for 8 years but throw a Nerf ball around the East Room, he would have still changed our nation simply by being President.
Where does it belong…but after these responses from others I think it might be water under the bridge.
. The pot has just been put back on the shelf.
More to the point, President Obama did not only receive control of the Executive Branch peacefully and without the forceful overthrow of the existing power structure but also in his turn handed power to a candidate who held the antithesis of his own sentiments, and did so peacefully himself, because his successor was also put into office by the lawful expression of the will of the people.
I don’t know if we appreciate how remarkable these transitions are in the history of politics. We have much to thank our Founders for, because the unbroken handing off of power between political adversaries for generation after generation was by no means something they could know with certainty was possible.
Let us also thank our military, because their faithful allegiance to our nation and to the Constitution in spite of their personal sentiments with regards to whoever is being elected to national office is certainly one of the reasons this unbroken line exists. We have never had a military coup because our military has such high ethical standards and such strong allegiance to the vision of the Founders that it has always been unthinkable that they would seize power for themselves by force.
Are you a troller sent here to get an argument going?
That is beyond ridiculous. Nothing personal.
Just picture what would have happened if an African-American man was going to be sworn in as President back in, oh, about 1965…
If one thought the Clinton’s were radical, which they were, Obama took it to a whole other level. Many of his values directly and radically oppose the Catholic Church. He made the USA a war zone of politics and ideology, as we can see the political climate has never been so frustrating. He paved the way for even more socialism and communism. Abortion laws in many states are going even more radical, and same sex marriage, gender ideology, and euthanasia is on the rise. So, yes he changed our nation, but not for the good. It’s a war zone, but that’s the way to win, divide and conquer.
I was going to reply that he hadn’t really done much of anything to change the nation. But I like your answer better.
Who me? No way am I a
Yes you are the brave one to respond to these folks around the coffee table. I cheer you and agree. Politics! Shhhh must be careful it can cause lots of problems.
Obama also supported the death penalty. Bill Clinton increased the scope of the federal death penalty. This is also against the teaching of the Church. On the other hand, the Affordable Care Act and Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals would be examples of policies that are in keeping with the Church’s teaching.
Uhm, not exactly.
The HHS contraception mandate demanded that (virtually) every employer had to pay for contraception and abortifacients.
No conscience clause was included.
Very well said.
Yes, I know there are controversies about some of the details, but Obama is a politician, not a theologian, and the overall impact of his policy seemed to me to tend more towards doing good than doing harm. In Britain, contraception and abortion are available free at the point of use on the National Health Service. I’m no great fan of the NHS, simply because it’s incredibly inefficient and in need of major reform. However, it is a way providing healthcare to the entire population of the UK. Everybody who pays tax in the UK (which includes, for example, tourists paying tax on goods and services) is contributing to contraception and abortion funding. Since both these things are legal in the UK, it is hard to see how one could demand an opt-out. The same goes for people who object to contributing to the defence budget (e.g. some Quakers). There is simply no way of not contributing to public services even if you happen not to approve of those services. As I understand it the right to opt out of funding contraception in the US is something that is currently before the courts, but it’s hard to see how there can be a fair and consistent way of depriving people of access to lawful healthcare services without providing funding from an alternative source or deciding that those services are no longer lawful.
Obama was to the left of the Clintons but he wasn’t socialist. At least not as President.
If he was then we would have single payer health care, etc.