Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-05-2009, 06:57 AM
 
94 posts, read 107,052 times
Reputation: 67

Advertisements

Should anyone who is a communist or believes in communism be allowed to hold a position for the white house? Should they even be in the white house? Is this the progressive way? Socialism verses communism, which does the left appreciate more?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-05-2009, 07:04 AM
 
1,360 posts, read 1,942,380 times
Reputation: 500
The Congressional oath of office reads as follows:

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.

Obviously...NAY
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2009, 07:05 AM
 
94 posts, read 107,052 times
Reputation: 67
Do czars take an oath, or just appointed?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2009, 07:10 AM
 
1,718 posts, read 2,299,392 times
Reputation: 613
Quote:
Originally Posted by locomotive View Post
Do czars take an oath, or just appointed?
The point is that Obama did take the oath. Communism is not the American way per the constitution. Obama should not be hiring communists to work in the White House.

Obama is circumventing the Constitutional process that requires Congressional approval by hiring these Czars. Obama is in violation of the Constitution that he took an oath to defend.

- Reel
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2009, 07:13 AM
 
35,016 posts, read 39,151,733 times
Reputation: 6195
Van Jones is a federal employee.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2009, 07:15 AM
 
35,016 posts, read 39,151,733 times
Reputation: 6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reelist in Atlanta View Post
The point is that Obama did take the oath. Communism is not the American way per the constitution. Obama should not be hiring communists to work in the White House.

Obama is circumventing the Constitutional process that requires Congressional approval by hiring these Czars. Obama is in violation of the Constitution that he took an oath to defend.

- Reel
"Czars" have been around since the 1940s. Bush had 46 - Obama has 34.

List of U.S. executive branch czars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Advantages cited for the creation of czar type posts are the ability to go outside of formal channels and find creative solutions for ad hoc problems, the ability to involve a lot of government players in big issue decision-making, and the ability to get a huge bureaucracy moving in the right direction. Problems can occur with getting all the parties to work together and with managing competing power centers.[6]"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2009, 07:22 AM
 
Location: Reading, PA
4,011 posts, read 4,425,530 times
Reputation: 843
Quote:
Originally Posted by locomotive View Post
Should anyone who is a communist or believes in communism be allowed to hold a position for the white house? Should they even be in the white house? Is this the progressive way? Socialism verses communism, which does the left appreciate more?
Of course. Communism is a legitimate economic/political/social philosophy. What's the problem with someone believing in it?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2009, 07:32 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,304,341 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by locomotive View Post
Should anyone who is a communist or believes in communism be allowed to hold a position for the white house? Should they even be in the white house? Is this the progressive way? Socialism verses communism, which does the left appreciate more?
Absolutely, positively emphatically, NO. Their entire philosophy is anathema to a free country, and should be viewed (and used to be view by everyone) as an enemy of the United States.

What is wrong with us?!

At this point in history, the Democrat Party is controlled by the "Progressives", whose ideas are Marxist/socialist in nature. They espouse things like "social justice", "economic democracy" (redistribution of wealth) and other philosophies that go against the ideas of liberty and freedom.

The individual should not have power, in their view.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2009, 07:35 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,304,341 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by locomotive View Post
Do czars take an oath, or just appointed?
No, they don't, which is why they do not get Senate confirmation either. They are the president's appointees, and answer only to him. This is why they are so dangerous to the Republic.

This stuff has got to stop.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2009, 07:38 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,419 posts, read 20,304,341 times
Reputation: 8958
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
"Czars" have been around since the 1940s. Bush had 46 - Obama has 34.

List of U.S. executive branch czars - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Advantages cited for the creation of czar type posts are the ability to go outside of formal channels and find creative solutions for ad hoc problems, the ability to involve a lot of government players in big issue decision-making, and the ability to get a huge bureaucracy moving in the right direction. Problems can occur with getting all the parties to work together and with managing competing power centers.[6]"
I don't care how long they've been around or who had them in the past. We are seeing just how dangerous this kind of expansion of governmet with no oversight at all from Congress; i.e., no check and balance, can be. They have to go. This has got to end.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top