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 03-14-2014, 10:00 AM
 
45,548 posts, read 27,160,554 times
Reputation: 23867

Advertisements

Obama's Orwellian View Of Freedom

In a recent speech to the Democratic National Committee, the president lamented that "we've let the other side define the word 'freedom' for too long." Then, as he often does, Obama set up a straw man argument, claiming to Republicans freedom means "what's in it for me?" or "I've got no obligations to anybody."

Of course his interpretation is entirely wrong of what freedom is. He sets us his self made straw man as a platform to redefine what freedom is.

"Freedom," he said, "is the peace of mind of knowing that if you got sick, you won't lose everything.

"Freedom is the ability to change jobs and start a new business, chase a new idea without fear of losing your health insurance.

"Freedom is signing for that new home and knowing it can't be taken from you because you actually understand what you're signing.

"Freedom is getting that new credit card and knowing the stakes and understanding how you're going to manage it.

"Freedom is the knowledge that ... you're not going to be treated like a second-class person once we fix our broken immigration system. That's freedom."



These are not facets of freedom. Freedom has nothing to do with outcome or results.

Freedom is about a person living as they want to live (without infringing upon others), which includes enjoying and supporting ourselves as we see fit. This doesn't mean that all things will turn out like we want. At minimum, we should be holding to the freedoms defined in the framework documents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-14-2014, 10:08 AM
 
Location: The Lone Star State
8,030 posts, read 9,050,022 times
Reputation: 5050
What he's speaking of sounds more like transparency and accountability.

Which is highly ironic, given the lack of these in his administration.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2014, 06:00 PM
 
Location: The Beautiful Pocono Mountains
5,450 posts, read 8,760,111 times
Reputation: 3002
It sounds like he simply wants to redefine freedom for his base and to create talking points for those running for election.

Little does he know that his credibility is shot with the majority of people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2014, 06:31 PM
 
2,025 posts, read 4,173,937 times
Reputation: 2540
Sounds like FDR's "4 freedoms".

Given his obvious contempt for the electorate, I'm not surprised that he feels the need to define "freedom" as a state of affairs that are approved by and only possible through his action.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2014, 07:11 PM
 
4,130 posts, read 4,460,163 times
Reputation: 3041
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC View Post
"Freedom," he said, "is the peace of mind of knowing that if you got sick, you won't lose everything.

"Freedom is the ability to change jobs and start a new business, chase a new idea without fear of losing your health insurance.

"Freedom is signing for that new home and knowing it can't be taken from you because you actually understand what you're signing.

"Freedom is getting that new credit card and knowing the stakes and understanding how you're going to manage it.

"Freedom is the knowledge that ... you're not going to be treated like a second-class person once we fix our broken immigration system. That's freedom."
I don't see what's wrong with this. Please tell me why each is so horrible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2014, 08:08 PM
 
9,763 posts, read 10,524,704 times
Reputation: 2052
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeraldCityWanderer View Post
I don't see what's wrong with this. Please tell me why each is so horrible.
Oh please. They are all horrific because Obama said them. Silly you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2014, 10:58 PM
 
Location: The Lone Star State
8,030 posts, read 9,050,022 times
Reputation: 5050
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeraldCityWanderer View Post
I don't see what's wrong with this. Please tell me why each is so horrible.
It's not that they're "horrible"... it's that they aren't the definition of freedom. So more like inaccurate, typical rhetoric speech in campaigning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2014, 04:35 AM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,782 posts, read 17,354,912 times
Reputation: 7990
Quote:
Originally Posted by sxrckr View Post
It's not that they're "horrible"... it's that they aren't the definition of freedom. So more like inaccurate, typical rhetoric speech in campaigning.
agreed; it is not so much horrible as stupid. If you take a wild animal, put it in a cage, give it all the food and water it wants, maybe even a revolving wheel for it to run on, have you given it "freedom?" Of course not, except under the newspeak Obama definition.

I wonder if America is now dumb enough to buy into this new definition of 'freedom?'
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2014, 08:12 AM
 
4,130 posts, read 4,460,163 times
Reputation: 3041
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
agreed; it is not so much horrible as stupid. If you take a wild animal, put it in a cage, give it all the food and water it wants, maybe even a revolving wheel for it to run on, have you given it "freedom?" Of course not, except under the newspeak Obama definition.

I wonder if America is now dumb enough to buy into this new definition of 'freedom?'
People who want health insurance that isn't dependent on their employers are animals?

People who get sick and don't have health insurance, so they lose everything to stay alive, are animals?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2014, 08:15 AM
 
12,638 posts, read 8,951,090 times
Reputation: 7458
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeraldCityWanderer View Post
People who want health insurance that isn't dependent on their employers are animals?

People who get sick and don't have health insurance, so they lose everything to stay alive, are animals?
People who want other people to pay for their health insurance are leeches.
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