Which only shows that they were greedy thugs, using the cloak of a Communist government.
Soviet era and current China are as socialist as Donald Trump, except those two governments truly ARE power hungry and deluded that they are unopposed. .
China has liberalized economically but politically is just as Red Communist as it ever was.
And Obama likes money. He loves sweet, sweet luxuries. He's full-on capitalist.
REALLY?! You REALLY can say THAT?!?!?
I pointed out his Hawaiin mentor being an avowed commie, his association with Marxists at college, he ALSO made a statement refering to private business as "the enemy." How does this make him a "full-on capitalist??"
And he'll want money after he leaves office, which means lobbying positions and speakers fees. Creating laws that end debates like gun control and sending SWAT teams to force Rand Paul to perform eye surgery on poor people counteract that income opportunity.
Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush do all manner of work TOGETHER - post their Presidency - especially stumping for Saudi Arabia.
So? Bill Clinton was a leftist but not nearly as much as Obama. Pappa Bush was no Ronald Reagan.
So? Every bastard whose run for office WANTS CONTROL. What next? You gonna tell me water is wet? Bob Marley smoked marajuana? Bill Clinton banged more box than all the box cutters on the planet?
Communist leaders, when they get into power, crack down heavily on their previous administration's followers, if any are alive after they take power. Obama didn't even entertain the idea of trying the prior administration for what the Democratic party called illegal and war crimes. He had the same 1 or 2 percent "mandate of the people" that GWB had as well, so he could have done that.
What's your point here?
Did you ever REALLY think Obama would do that, or that's what makes or breaks a Communist?
I seriously do not think anyone could get away with trying to do that at this point in time; any blather about trying Dubya for "war crimes" that was serious derived from EXTREME leftwing nuts, any that came from the peanut gallery on the left side of the aisle was nothing more than hollow political rhetoric. Come on, you know that!
No one has been put up against the wall. The FBI under Bush 43's administration did as much labelling non-Christian and Christian extremist religious groups as potentially dangerous criminal groups. And yet, even during "the War on Terror" - thousands of Muslims were not thrown into camps, despite what the Democratic Party whined.
Dubya was not a conservative leader. He was only nominally conservative at best. The FBI certainly proceeded much as it had done under Clinton because Dubya left many of Clinton's myrmidons in office, and also because no president actually APPOINTS every FBI employee.
And Power is the means to an end for money. His Presidency has months (or years, if you're too dumb to exercise your rights at the ballot box) left. After that, he'll need clout. And that means, he has to leave things undone so he can hang around Washington, and peddle semi-socialist ideas in exchange for money.
If Obama were a worse commie-style leader than Clinton, where's the Waco? Where's the Ruby Ridge? Clinton bounced those off in his initial term.
First of all, Ruby Ridge happened under Pappa Bush's tutelage. It was Waco that happened under Clinton's.Both
involved screw-ups and other acts of nonfeasance which were not put into effect through some type of presidential order, which would be about the only way the above comment could be held germaine to this matter. Obama has hardly been goiven an opportunity for a "WACO" -- how many Branch Davidians do you see holed up in current America with guns?
You are grasping at straws in thinking we're looking at an age of tyrrany and loss of personal control. At most, we'll get a token attempt at a bill which will be shredded and destroyed in the House, not even able to reach the Senate floor.
Then he can say "I tried for reasonable gun laws." Then limp to the Brady Campaign and get money from them.
Well, in case you haven't noticed, we lost our right to "control" whether or not we maintain a health insurance policy -- we're REQUIRED to, under OBAMACARE, unless the Supreme Court knocks it down or the repubs get to repeal it. So it's happening
, piece by piece, RIGHT UNDER YOUR NOSE!!!!!!
We are certainly headed into an age of "soft tyranny" if Obamacare is upheld.
Do you really think Clinton was NOT as "control-minded" as Obama??:"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans..."
~~ Bill Clinton, USA Today March 11, 1993"If the personal freedom guaranteed by the constitution inhibits the government's ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees."
~~ Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993.
And lest you think a "tyranny" must rely on Ruby Ridges and Wacos, consider C.S. Lewis's version of a tyranny:
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent busybodies. The robber barron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they will do so with the approval of their own conscience."
Do you think, perhaps, it's just possible that what Obama's doing (Obamacare, making appointments while kongress is actually in session, nixing the Canadian oil pipeline, etc) he's doing "with the approval of his own conscience?"