For those of you leftie leaners, or 'fair minded' moderates who are feeling offended by the question... what? Is there something wrong with asking that? You're not going to say that there is anything wrong with any of those answers, are you? Half or more of his staff is or is fond of, one or the other. Obama himself gave the Presidential Medal of Freedom to a Democratic Socialist, are you saying that there is something wrong with those?
What is it that aggravates you about the question?
Do you think you know the answer? Based on what?
I'd say go ask Obama, but being as he's a liar, I don't really think that would get you anywhere. But, ok, whichever answer you'd like to give, go ahead and insert that here ___. There. Now. What did that tell you about him? What is it you think you now know about your President that you didn't before, or what do you now feel more confident, or justified about, that you didn't before?
Personally, I think the question, and whatever answer is given, is pretty much worthless. Better to ask, whatever label he goes under, are his actions compatible with governing the United States of America?
Before you go getting offended again, can you tell me what IS and IS NOT compatible with governing the United States of America? Or, taking baby steps, what are the requirements of that?
- Wouldn't they have to govern within the constraints of the Constitution?
- Wouldn't they have to respect the Rule of Law?
- Wouldn't they have to respect an individuals Right to live their own life as they see fit?
Which law? The immigration law, or some other law? Hint: It doesnt' matter which law you answer as being 'more important', to arbitrarily - which means without an objective basis, simply asserting a preference for one or another by whim - select one law over another to impose, follow or disregard, is to officially discard, repudiate and discard the rule of law.
"A Republic of Laws, not of men!", or even with Jefferson's,
"The true foundation of republican government is the equal right of every citizen, in his person and property, and in their management. ", all of that, every concept and principle of that, is quite simply jettisoned with any such Executive Order as that which has been given on immigration... or education... or EPA... or... etc., etc., etc.
Tell me how that is compatible with governing the United States of America, a Constitutional Republic which was designed to secure the fundamental rights of its citizens, their property, and their liberty to live their own lives?
It is enough for me to know that President Obama is an Anti-American President... which flavor of political party he claims, or disavows, is of no consequence.
Let me give you another hint: If what you have is a government which imposes laws or rules on the people at the whim of executives in the White house, the EPA, the DOJ, the SEC, the DHS, the HHS, the etc., etc., etc., then what you have are a people who conduct their lives under the permissions that they've been granted by those in power, to do what those in power have not forbidden them to do. What you do NOT have, in that scheme of things, is liberty.
Now, you go ahead and fill in the ___ for what you want to refer to Obama as being.
I don't really care. I know what he is not, he is not fit to govern the United States of America.
Are those who are opposing him, or the current leaders of the 'loyal opposition', in the next election any better? Can they be called 'Pro-American' in this view?
Oh great, now you're really going to get me depressed.