Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
xFelix

Fidel Hussein Obama

46 posts in this topic

Seeing as how we started the Frankenstein-President's name with Fidel, let's see what they have in common!

Censorship:

Obama Suppresses the truth from ever seeing the light of day.

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/04/obama-has-prosecuted-more-whistleblowers-than-all-other-presidents-combined.html

Vs

Fidel censors even the media.

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

----

Obama pushes for assault weapons ban.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/obama-assault-weapons-ban

Vs

Fidel effectively disarms the country, then holds a helpess country against it's will.

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=auto&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cuba.cu%2Fgobierno%2Fdiscursos%2F1959%2Fesp%2Ff080159e.html

----

Obama

Now, look, I get it. These days, I look in the mirror and I have to admit, I’m not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be. (Laughter.) Time passes. You get a little gray. (Laughter.)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2013/04/27/remarks-president-white-house-correspondents-association-dinner

He acknowledges that age has set in, but does not disavow being socialist.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/14/obama-pushing-congress-on_n_835277.html

http://www.utsandiego.com/news/2013/May/11/tp-obama-pushes-health-care-law-says-it-is-here/

Obama forcing the reform of Healthcare and education.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/05/14/ap_reporters_allegedly_spied_on_by_the_justice_department_aren_t_alone.html

Obama overseeing the press..

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/04/obama-has-prosecuted-more-whistleblowers-than-all-other-presidents-combined.html

Again this link must be cited.. it is a clear demonstration of his intolerance to internal dissent.

Vs

Fidel

In 1961 Castro proclaimed the socialist nature of his revolutionary administration, with Cuba becoming a one-party state under Communist Party governance. Ideologically-based reforms introducing central economic planning and expanding healthcare and education were accompanied by state control of the press and the suppression of internal dissent.

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

-----

Obama

http://www.barackobamafile.com/about-barack-obama/obama-school-records/

http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/05/multiple-obama-birth-certificates-surface-in-alabama-eligibility-case/

Hides his health and school records, which are relevant because they are used to determine his qualification of presidency..

Vs

Fidel

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-12005971

Hides his health records because he doesn't want opposing governments to be alerted as to when an opportune time to strike would be.

-----

The amount of similarities is appalling.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinda interesting; I remember when Bush Jr. was President and the other side of the political fence was making similar comparisons. One thing people forget is that in the US a President is limited to two terms. The time to get excited is when they start trying to overturn that.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Kinda interesting; I remember when Bush Jr. was President and the other side of the political fence was making similar comparisons. One thing people forget is that in the US a President is limited to two terms. The time to get excited is when they start trying to overturn that.

Others' comparisons are usually based on opinions of single events... My comparison is based on facts spanning over several events.

Other parts of the constitution have already been defiled by him, why not the rest of it?

I do agree though, if he makes a 3rd attempt at presidency, it's worrying time.

Edited by xFelix
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it possible to vote for zero stars in a topic?

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The very title of this thread illustrates why it's impossible to take the world of American party politics seriously any more.

Edited by Colonel Rhuairidh
5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

So basically, I presented factual and cited material to support my claim that the two are in more ways than one similar... and you respond in concern about how I titled the thread.

Well, I am sorry to rain on your parade, but I am going to do it.

Making a broad statement such as "why it's impossible to take the world of American party politics seriously any more" based on one person's title of a thread on an online forum is well... Genius! Furthermore, your judgement of all American politics based on a few(or one) people/person is just about as ridiculous as your contribution to the subject.

Thank you for your opinion, however useless it might have been ;)

Edited by xFelix
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The very title of this thread illustrates why it's impossible to take the world of American party politics seriously any more.

I haven't taken American party politics seriously for years. Our 2 party system is intellectually and morally bankrupt.

But I do like the thread title! :tu:

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So basically, I presented factual and cited material to support my claim that the two are in more ways than one similar... and you respond in concern about how I titled the thread.

Well, I am sorry to rain on your parade, but I am going to do it.

Making a broad statement such as "why it's impossible to take the world of American party politics seriously any more" based on one person's title of a thread on an online forum is well... Genius! Furthermore, your judgement of all American politics based on a few(or one) people/person is just about as ridiculous as your contribution to the subject.

Thank you for your opinion, however useless it might have been ;)

Oh no, please don't get me wrong, it wasn't just the thread title.

It was the whole argument, such as it is. if my contribution to the subject was ridiculous, then it was in proportion to the absurdity of the whole premise of the thread.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Seeing as how we started the Frankenstein-President's name with Fidel, let's see what they have in common!

Censorship:

Obama Suppresses the truth from ever seeing the light of day.

http://www.washingto...s-combined.html

Vs

Fidel censors even the media.

http://en.wikipedia....sorship_in_Cuba

----

Obama pushes for assault weapons ban.

http://www.huffingto...ult-weapons-ban

Vs

Fidel effectively disarms the country, then holds a helpess country against it's will.

http://translate.goo...p/f080159e.html

----

Obama

http://www.whitehous...ociation-dinner

He acknowledges that age has set in, but does not disavow being socialist.

http://www.huffingto...n_n_835277.html

http://www.utsandieg...ays-it-is-here/

Obama forcing the reform of Healthcare and education.

http://www.slate.com...en_t_alone.html

Obama overseeing the press..

http://www.washingto...s-combined.html

Again this link must be cited.. it is a clear demonstration of his intolerance to internal dissent.

Vs

Fidel

http://en.wikipedia....ki/Fidel_Castro

-----

Obama

http://www.barackoba...school-records/

http://freedomoutpos...igibility-case/

Hides his health and school records, which are relevant because they are used to determine his qualification of presidency..

Vs

Fidel

http://www.bbc.co.uk...merica-12005971

Hides his health records because he doesn't want opposing governments to be alerted as to when an opportune time to strike would be.

-----

The amount of similarities is appalling.

Wow. That is scary.... But history does repeat itself.

obama-socialist-poster.jpg

socialism-socialism-politics-obama-demotivational-poster-1253890946.jpg

Thought you might like those... :)

Edited by Kowalski
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta love hyperbole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta tell you all that the States is basically a socialist country, certainly as much as Vietnam. Schools, the post, highways, welfare, elderly pensions, food for the poor, agricultural "stability", and so on are state owned, and health care soon will be. Other industries -- insurance, labor, banking, real estate, power generation, lumber, mineral extraction, international trade, and even mom and pop retail outfits, are all far more under state control than in Vietnam if you include all the local and state regulation with that of the Federal Government. Just take a look at a map of the States and what is under the Interior Department.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama has a long way to go before he reaches Casto levels. You speak of media censorship, yet Fox News spends all their time talking about how horrible Obama is. You talk about disarming the country but that's never going to happen and even the mildest of gun reforms are dead in the water. You talk about Obama being a socialist, which is a joke given that in any other Western nation he'd be viewed as a right wing politican. You talk about qualifications to be president when the GOP has never seriously tried to block Obama from running in elections.

All in all there's nothing to see here.Obama is no worst than Bush, Clinton, Bush, etc etc.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Castro was sponsored by the Soviets remember and help Cuba financially, Castro used words too influenced people of Cuba to hate America by the Soviets.

You can't really compare a a sponsored leader to Obama or Bush, Nixon etc.

Turkey vs Cuba would of better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Obama has a long way to go before he reaches Casto levels. You speak of media censorship, yet Fox News spends all their time talking about how horrible Obama is. You talk about disarming the country but that's never going to happen and even the mildest of gun reforms are dead in the water. You talk about Obama being a socialist, which is a joke given that in any other Western nation he'd be viewed as a right wing politican. You talk about qualifications to be president when the GOP has never seriously tried to block Obama from running in elections.

All in all there's nothing to see here.Obama is no worst than Bush, Clinton, Bush, etc etc.

Yeah where is this media censorship? The very fact that we can come online and compare Obama to Castro right there proves that there is in fact zero REAL censorship going on. Yes the media is biased and the owners of media companies have agenda's which may or may not agree with the agenda of the President. As you said, Fox News has an agenda that is basically focused on making people hate Obama, and getting him out of the White House as soon as possible. They are not censored in any way by the white house, and if the white house dared to even try to censor Fox news, Fox would have a field day with it.

And yes the administration has pushed for controversial things like health care reform and gun control. But look what happened with gun control it fell flat on its face! The people still have the power in this country, and that is why the powers that be try to keep us divided along party lines, so that we do not unite and push back on corporate lobbyist interests. Socialism? More like corporatism. Spread the wealth? Yeah sure if you mean spread the wealth into the pockets of some of the big corporations that are 'too big to fail'.

All this debate and heated talk on issues is good, and means that our system is still working at least somewhat. I will start to worry when the day comes when the president seeks to change the rules to allow for a 3rd presidential term, when fox news and CNN agree on all issues, when drones fill our skies and privacy is lost, and when the internet is censored and controlled by the state. As long as we keep debating and talking that day will never come. As soon as we all shut up, sit down, and start to just take whatever is given to us for the sake of 'keeping us safe' that is when I will know that all is lost.

Edited by Einsteinium
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

has Mr. O outlawed all opposition parties, imposed state censorship of the media and cancelled elections and set an indefinite term on his staying in office? Only when you can tick these boxes can the things that are said about him be regarded as anything other than too laughable to even bother discussing.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Felix have you been to Cuba?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Obama has a long way to go before he reaches Casto levels. You speak of media censorship, yet Fox News spends all their time talking about how horrible Obama is. You talk about disarming the country but that's never going to happen and even the mildest of gun reforms are dead in the water. You talk about Obama being a socialist, which is a joke given that in any other Western nation he'd be viewed as a right wing politican. You talk about qualifications to be president when the GOP has never seriously tried to block Obama from running in elections.

All in all there's nothing to see here.Obama is no worst than Bush, Clinton, Bush, etc etc.

Just because his attempts fail does not mean that he does not make these attempts.

Did he attempt to strip us of assault weapons? YES

Did he attempt to reform the education system? YES

Did he attempt to reform the healthcare system? YES

Did he attempt to monitor and censor the AP? YES

Did he attempt to bring his justice to internal dissent? YES

Did he attempt to make a law that makes him have the power of declaring war, life and death, and spying on the citizens? YES

Failure to do the above mentioned things, doesn't mean HE is less alike someone who did pass them... It just means their are people who did want to put in the energy to stop him, for whatever reasoning they may have had.

Oh another thing, just because the other party did not want to stop him, does not mean he qualifies.

When I joined the army, I had to surrender my records, ALL of them, before I was even given a contract to sign.

The constitution has a certain requirement for presidency, and Obama still has not met this requirement by refusing to show his birth certificate.(Actually he spent upwards of a million dollars to hide it.)

I speak of censorship when I see the AP ready to fight the legal standing of their being monitored... It's the press, you can't monitor them for any reason. Obama did though... How does monitoring of the press mean control over them? Who in their right mind would go to the press knowing that they are being monitored and if you speak of the wrong thing you will just be another statistic to Obama's whistleblower campaign? Anyone with any news from the inside must not be allowed to speak of it..

That IS censorship, as well as psychological warfare on american citizens.

Castro was sponsored by the Soviets remember and help Cuba financially, Castro used words too influenced people of Cuba to hate America by the Soviets.

You can't really compare a a sponsored leader to Obama or Bush, Nixon etc.

Turkey vs Cuba would of better.

http://www.opensecre...8&cid=N00009638

http://www.opensecre...12&id=N00009638

Big corporations bought his presidency, and the government basically bought his second term...

So, yes I can compare one leader being bought off.. to another leader being bought off lol

Edited by xFelix

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because his attempts fail does not mean that he does not make these attempts.

Did he attempt to strip us of assault weapons? YES

Did he attempt to reform the education system? YES

Did he attempt to reform the healthcare system? YES

Did he attempt to monitor and censor the AP? YES

Did he attempt to bring his justice to internal dissent? YES

Did he attempt to make a law that makes him have the power of declaring war, life and death, and spying on the citizens? YES

Failure to do the above mentioned things, doesn't mean HE is less alike someone who did pass them... It just means their are people who did want to put in the energy to stop him, for whatever reasoning they may have had.

I think one thing you missed out was how the Dear Leader seems to have introduced a law, which seems to have worked very succesfully, that said that anyone who did not agree with him had to thrown away their sense of proportion or any kind of awareness of what political systems such as Socialism or Communism are actually like. Honestly, it's quite hilarious, it really is. Yes, of course, the Dear Leader has muzzled the freedom of the Press. The poor old Murdoch empire,all those pro-Republican papers and TV channels, the world watched in horror as Obama's Brownshirts stomped in, beat the senior executives and the presenters about, and threw them out into the street after closing them down. And now of course the state-run media is just full of stories about how the kids strew Dear Leader's path with flowers, and how construction is proceeding on the Triumphal Arch that he's building to celebrate his instalment as Perpetual Dictator. And it was shocking (but, of course, not reported in the media) about the abolition of the Republican Party and how its leaders were incarcerated in his network of prison camps, wasn't it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because his attempts fail does not mean that he does not make these attempts.

Did he attempt to strip us of assault weapons? YES

Did he attempt to reform the education system? YES

Did he attempt to reform the healthcare system? YES

Did he attempt to monitor and censor the AP? YES

Did he attempt to bring his justice to internal dissent? YES

Did he attempt to make a law that makes him have the power of declaring war, life and death, and spying on the citizens? YES

Failure to do the above mentioned things, doesn't mean HE is less alike someone who did pass them... It just means their are people who did want to put in the energy to stop him, for whatever reasoning they may have had.

Oh another thing, just because the other party did not want to stop him, does not mean he qualifies.

When I joined the army, I had to surrender my records, ALL of them, before I was even given a contract to sign.

The constitution has a certain requirement for presidency, and Obama still has not met this requirement by refusing to show his birth certificate.(Actually he spent upwards of a million dollars to hide it.)

I speak of censorship when I see the AP ready to fight the legal standing of their being monitored... It's the press, you can't monitor them for any reason. Obama did though... How does monitoring of the press mean control over them? Who in their right mind would go to the press knowing that they are being monitored and if you speak of the wrong thing you will just be another statistic to Obama's whistleblower campaign? Anyone with any news from the inside must not be allowed to speak of it..

That IS censorship, as well as psychological warfare on american citizens.

http://www.opensecre...8&cid=N00009638

http://www.opensecre...12&id=N00009638

Big corporations bought his presidency, and the government basically bought his second term...

So, yes I can compare one leader being bought off.. to another leader being bought off lol

Well to be fair the US education system is in desperate need of reform, and so is our healthcare system so I would actually be more upset with the President if he just did nothing with those issues. People may disagree with what he did/proposed to do, but that is our system. An idea is proposed, debated, and then voted on etc. We are way far away from Obama dictating reforms with no questions asked, congress has to do its job, and the supreme court has to do its job. The president is not a dictator for crying out loud. Presidents historically have almost always wanted more power, because having more power would make their job easier. Do you have any idea how difficult it is to get congress/supreme court/your own cabinet members to agree? Personally I would hate to have that job, and on top of that having the american people and the press watching and criticizing your every move? I can see why the president takes as many vacations as possible, jeesh.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just because his attempts fail does not mean that he does not make these attempts.

Did he attempt to strip us of assault weapons? YES

Did he attempt to reform the education system? YES

Did he attempt to reform the healthcare system? YES

Did he attempt to monitor and censor the AP? YES

Did he attempt to bring his justice to internal dissent? YES

Did he attempt to make a law that makes him have the power of declaring war, life and death, and spying on the citizens? YES

Failure to do the above mentioned things, doesn't mean HE is less alike someone who did pass them... It just means their are people who did want to put in the energy to stop him, for whatever reasoning they may have had.

Oh another thing, just because the other party did not want to stop him, does not mean he qualifies.

When I joined the army, I had to surrender my records, ALL of them, before I was even given a contract to sign.

The constitution has a certain requirement for presidency, and Obama still has not met this requirement by refusing to show his birth certificate.(Actually he spent upwards of a million dollars to hide it.)

I speak of censorship when I see the AP ready to fight the legal standing of their being monitored... It's the press, you can't monitor them for any reason. Obama did though... How does monitoring of the press mean control over them? Who in their right mind would go to the press knowing that they are being monitored and if you speak of the wrong thing you will just be another statistic to Obama's whistleblower campaign? Anyone with any news from the inside must not be allowed to speak of it..

That IS censorship, as well as psychological warfare on american citizens.

1) Clinton also put in an assault weapon ban. Was he just like Castro too? And you'll also note that the ban was only on certain weapons. The America people would have still been armed to the teeth even if it had gone through.

2) Since when is reforming the education system a bad thing? From what I hear it could use some work.

3) Since when is reforming healthcare a bad thing? The US system badly needs it.

4) Is his dealings with AP a concern and should be brought to light? Yes. Is it blanket media censorship? No.

5) Given how much outright and deeply personal hatred is thrown Obama's way he's doing a horrible job at surpressing internal dissent. It's like he's not even trying...

6) I thought Bush did that? Does that means Bush is also an evil socialist?

As for documents Obama has put out his birth certificate...some time ago. He even put out two versions of it because the crazy birthers won't shut up about it. And while the AP monitoring and the targetting of whistleblowers is troubling and should be investigated, making hyperbolic claims like you have only distract from these legimate concerns and do more harm than good.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh another thing, just because the other party did not want to stop him, does not mean he qualifies.

When I joined the army, I had to surrender my records, ALL of them, before I was even given a contract to sign.

The constitution has a certain requirement for presidency, and Obama still has not met this requirement by refusing to show his birth certificate.(Actually he spent upwards of a million dollars to hide it.)

Actually he released two forms of his birth certificate, and the state of Hawaii confirmed their authenticity. What more do you expect? Would you ask the same regarding Bush? Clinton? Reagan? Joining the army is not the same as becoming president and the president did surrender his records to the government to confirm his eligibility to run for president. Or are you buying into the foolish BS circulating online that he has all these 'sealed' records that nobody can ever see? This claim is concisely debunked here: http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/obamas-sealed-records/

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obama has indeed its known

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) Clinton also put in an assault weapon ban. Was he just like Castro too? And you'll also note that the ban was only on certain weapons. The America people would have still been armed to the teeth even if it had gone through.

2) Since when is reforming the education system a bad thing? From what I hear it could use some work.

3) Since when is reforming healthcare a bad thing? The US system badly needs it.

4) Is his dealings with AP a concern and should be brought to light? Yes. Is it blanket media censorship? No.

5) Given how much outright and deeply personal hatred is thrown Obama's way he's doing a horrible job at surpressing internal dissent. It's like he's not even trying...

6) I thought Bush did that? Does that means Bush is also an evil socialist?

As for documents Obama has put out his birth certificate...some time ago. He even put out two versions of it because the crazy birthers won't shut up about it. And while the AP monitoring and the targetting of whistleblowers is troubling and should be investigated, making hyperbolic claims like you have only distract from these legimate concerns and do more harm than good.

1) Having stupid little pistols, bolt-action rifles, and the like vs the military's full automatic machine guns and assault rifles.. Armed to the teeth but none of the armament would serve any better than bows and arrows.

2) Reforming the education system is a good thing... Until you make it so that the schools that need the most help get the least...

3) Nobody with half a brain likes Obamacare, if not for it being forced on them... For the mere fact that he proposes a panel of unknown people control how the entire system is managed.

4) Did I ever once say it was blanket censorship? I'll wait while you find the part where I said it was... I said it was censorship, and even insinuated at the malicious intent behind it.

5) Horrible job at suppressing dissent, but he has convicted more whistleblowers than all the other presidents combined?

6) I stand corrected, he didn't make the law... But he knows of it, and instead of restoring our constitutional rights.. He chooses to abuse that law.

----

I did not at any point say Obama was a Dictator, or a Communist... I just said he's got some shocking similarities to a known oppressor, I then pointed them out.

Well to be fair the US education system is in desperate need of reform, and so is our healthcare system so I would actually be more upset with the President if he just did nothing with those issues. People may disagree with what he did/proposed to do, but that is our system. An idea is proposed, debated, and then voted on etc. We are way far away from Obama dictating reforms with no questions asked, congress has to do its job, and the supreme court has to do its job. The president is not a dictator for crying out loud. Presidents historically have almost always wanted more power, because having more power would make their job easier. Do you have any idea how difficult it is to get congress/supreme court/your own cabinet members to agree? Personally I would hate to have that job, and on top of that having the american people and the press watching and criticizing your every move? I can see why the president takes as many vacations as possible, jeesh.

I agree that president's have always wanted more power, Obama might not be a dictator, but his having more power hasn't resulted in him doing a better job. All it's done is given him more toys to play with in his mind, and in the mind of some.. Well he's just abusing his power. Yea I can see why he takes so many vacations too.. But my perspective is different than yours.

I think one thing you missed out was how the Dear Leader seems to have introduced a law, which seems to have worked very succesfully, that said that anyone who did not agree with him had to thrown away their sense of proportion or any kind of awareness of what political systems such as Socialism or Communism are actually like. Honestly, it's quite hilarious, it really is. Yes, of course, the Dear Leader has muzzled the freedom of the Press. The poor old Murdoch empire,all those pro-Republican papers and TV channels, the world watched in horror as Obama's Brownshirts stomped in, beat the senior executives and the presenters about, and threw them out into the street after closing them down. And now of course the state-run media is just full of stories about how the kids strew Dear Leader's path with flowers, and how construction is proceeding on the Triumphal Arch that he's building to celebrate his instalment as Perpetual Dictator. And it was shocking (but, of course, not reported in the media) about the abolition of the Republican Party and how its leaders were incarcerated in his network of prison camps, wasn't it.

What in the world are you even talking about? We're here having a normal debate where I say one person's politics have shocking similarities to another's... And you're off on the moon talking about flying ninja monkeys and what not?!

I guess when I made a comparison, you decided to interpret what I was saying to mean that the president is communist..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

wow thanks for posting this. i bet he will try to get congress to change the 22st Amendment and run for a thrid time.

and yet millions of these followers would say this is bull but its all true

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What in the world are you even talking about? We're here having a normal debate where I say one person's politics have shocking similarities to another's... And you're off on the moon talking about flying ninja monkeys and what not?!

I guess when I made a comparison, you decided to interpret what I was saying to mean that the president is communist..

it's called satire, which is the only way that this argument can possibly really be responded to.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.