Would Mr. Obama take his on advise

[JerryNumbers]

If the streets of America were filled with protesters asking for Mr. Obama to step down as president, would he heed the advise he seems to have passed on the Egypt's leader?

Would he advise the military & or any other law enforcing officials to do no harm to any of those that are protesting against him being president?

[John81]

No.

Obama chose to ignore the Tea Party rallies, then he tried to dismiss them when they grew, and once they got so large he couldn't keep doing this, he set loose with the attacks trying paint them as racists.

Obama has also chose to ignore the results of the last election which made it clear the majority does not like what Obama and the Dems are doing.

Obama is for Obama.

[Invicta]

No.

Obama chose to ignore the Tea Party rallies, then he tried to dismiss them when they grew, and once they got so large he couldn't keep doing this, he set loose with the attacks trying paint them as racists.

Obama has also chose to ignore the results of the last election which made it clear the majority does not like what Obama and the Dems are doing.

Obama is for Obama.

Obama is the elected president. The protests in arabia are against un elected tyrants. No comparison.

[John81]

Obama is the elected president. The protests in arabia are against un elected tyrants. No comparison.

Actually there is. An elected president should be even more responsive to the people. That's not the case with Obama. Obama declares he can ignore the people he chooses to ignore while telling others they must listen to certain people.

Obama has also been very inconsistent in what leaders he declares must listen to the rallies of the people, and those he remains silent about.

When it's all said and done, it doesn't matter if a leader is elected or not, they can both be tyrants or good leaders.

[Invicta]

Actually there is. An elected president should be even more responsive to the people. That's not the case with Obama. Obama declares he can ignore the people he chooses to ignore while telling others they must listen to certain people.

Obama has also been very inconsistent in what leaders he declares must listen to the rallies of the people, and those he remains silent about.

When it's all said and done, it doesn't matter if a leader is elected or not, they can both be tyrants or good leaders.

I don't agree.

You can shortly vote him out, or not as the case may be. Perhaps the majority will vote him back, or not, I don't know. But those in Arab countries don't have that choice.

[John81]

I don't agree.

You can shortly vote him out, or not as the case may be. Perhaps the majority will vote him back, or not, I don't know. But those in Arab countries don't have that choice.

Considering how rigged the election system is here, we mostly have an illusion of choice.

Wtih regards to the Arabs, who is to say the newly appointed tyrant would be any better than the current one? Surveys, polls and interviews in these lands indicate the vast majority of the population, and specifically the protesters in those countries, want full implimentation of Sharia law. That's not democracy, not power to the people, not opposing a tyrant in the name of freedom and liberty.

[Bro Jim]

I didn't think that I might say something like this but, no he should not step down, if he did he would being going against the government that the nation is built on. We are a Republic, not a democracy. If he was to step down because it seems to be the popular thing to do then where does it stop? Our rule of government are set up to protect us as a country. I realize that we have "representatives' that have taken us in the wrong direction and we have allow them to pass laws that are not always for our good. Can you imagine what it would be like if everything in America was run on what was popular at the time.

Let's start having the preacher preach what is most popular with the congregation on Sunday morning and not what God has put on his heart for us. I 'm talking about churches we go to, not the worldly emergent bunch that does that already. What a picture of where we would be if we allowed our country to be run by popular opinion.

And 9/10 of the time it isn't the laws that get us, it is the regulations attached after the law is passed.

We must speak up but remember 1000 emails = 100 snail mails = 10 phone calls = 1 personal visit.

[John81]

I didn't think that I might say something like this but, no he should not step down, if he did he would being going against the government that the nation is built on. We are a Republic, not a democracy. If he was to step down because it seems to be the popular thing to do then where does it stop? Our rule of government are set up to protect us as a country. I realize that we have "representatives' that have taken us in the wrong direction and we have allow them to pass laws that are not always for our good. Can you imagine what it would be like if everything in America was run on what was popular at the time.

Let's start having the preacher preach what is most popular with the congregation on Sunday morning and not what God has put on his heart for us. I 'm talking about churches we go to, not the worldly emergent bunch that does that already. What a picture of where we would be if we allowed our country to be run by popular opinion.

And 9/10 of the time it isn't the laws that get us, it is the regulations attached after the law is passed.

We must speak up but remember 1000 emails = 100 snail mails = 10 phone calls = 1 personal visit.

America was formed as a Republic but she no longer operates as a Republic.

Nixon's resignation had to do more with public outcrys for him to be gone than it did with what the Senate might do. There does come a time, even when dealing with elected officials, that if a majority are protesting for them to step down, they should do so, if for no other reason that because it would be best for the country at that time.

Thus far, there is no outcry for Obama to step down. I agree that he, nor any other president, should step down only because some call for it. However, if Obama, or any other president, were to do something egregious and the people rose up demanding him to step down, doing so may be best for the sake of the country.

[JerryNumbers]

Was not Mubarak elected? Did they not have an election? Rightly I think there election can be trusted about as much as ours.

What does being elected have to do with it?

Perhaps Christians in Egypt should just pray for their leaders, pray that life goes well for them so they can live a peaceful life, instead of protesting through the streets, demanding him to step down.

1Ti 2:1 ¶ I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
1Ti 2:2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

And please remember, the kings in those days that God's Word was inspired was not elected, and there was not much personal freedom, and Christians were persecuted.

[John81]

Was not Mubarak elected? Did they not have an election? Rightly I think there election can be trusted about as much as ours.

What does being elected have to do with it?

Perhaps Christians in Egypt should just pray for their leaders, pray that life goes well for them so they can live a peaceful life, instead of protesting through the streets, demanding him to step down.

1Ti 2:1 ¶ I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men;
1Ti 2:2 For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
1Ti 2:3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;

And please remember, the kings in those days that God's Word was inspired was not elected, and there was not much personal freedom, and Christians were persecuted.

:amen:

[Invicta]

Was not Mubarak elected? Did they not have an election? Rightly I think there election can be trusted about as much as ours.

What does being elected have to do with it?

I don't think Mubarak was elected. He was the army's man.

What does being elected have to do with it? What if he is re-elected.

But yes, I agree that ia a good question. What does being elected have to do with it? Not a lot as it is God that puts over men whom he will. So Obama is God's man.

[John81]

I don't think Mubarak was elected. He was the army's man.

What does being elected have to do with it? What if he is re-elected.

But yes, I agree that ia a good question. What does being elected have to do with it? Not a lot as it is God that puts over men whom he will. So Obama is God's man.

No, Obama is not God's man, he is simply the one God determined to have over America at this time; likely as not as a form of punishment. Scripture indicates that God turns wicked people over to their own wickedness as a form of punishment. This is something to consider when looking at the leaders in Islamic nations; and other nations as well.

[JerryNumbers]

I don't think Mubarak was elected. He was the army's man.

What does being elected have to do with it? What if he is re-elected.

But yes, I agree that ia a good question. What does being elected have to do with it? Not a lot as it is God that puts over men whom he will. So Obama is God's man.

Check it out for self, search the web, and yes, he was elected, if not, I would not have said he was. I believe the year was 2005.

[John81]

It's terrible how biased and unreliable the American press is. Mubarak has been one of the more faithful Arab allies yet they attacked him like he was nothing but evil. Then, they deny or downplay the role of "radical Islamists" in fomenting the protests and being the ones calling the shots behind the scenes. Even the president took this route.

It seems as if the American press and president would like to see more Arab nations become like Iran.

[Invicta]

Check it out for self, search the web, and yes, he was elected, if not, I would not have said he was. I believe the year was 2005.

In April 1975, Mubarak was appointed by Sadat as Vice President of the Egyptian republic.

Following the assassination of President Sadat in October, 1981 by a Jihad cell in the military led by Lieutenant Khalid Islambouli, Hosni Mubarak became the President of the Arabic Republic of Egypt, and the Chairman of the National Democratic Party (NDP).

President Mubarak has been re-elected by majority votes in a referendum for successive terms on four occasions: in 1987, 1993, 1999
.

It was not an election, it was a referendum, there being no other candidates and as you know, dictators can fix such "elections."

The referendum in itself and its results are of questionable validity.After increased domestic and international pressure for democratic reform in Egypt, Mubarak asked the largely rubber stamp parliament on 26 February 2005 to amend the constitution to allow multi-candidate presidential elections by September 2005. Previously, Mubarak secured his position by having himself nominated by parliament, then confirmed without opposition in a referendum.

The September 2005 ballot was therefore a multiple candidate election rather than a referendum, but the electoral institutions, and security apparatus remain under the control of the President. The official state media, including the three government newspapers and state television also express views identical to the official line taken by Mubarak. In recent years however,

From Wikipedia,