Archive for the ‘debate’ Category

The Media Darling

I think I just threw up a little bit in my mouth. — J.

Salesman of the Year!

Barack Obama declared the other evening that, “It’s time for America to chart a new course.”  (Quite possibly the scariest words in American politics.)  And who wouldn’t buy what this guy is selling??? 

Obama promised affordable education and declared that a college education should be a birthright for every American!  Obama promised affordable healthcare for every American and that all of us will have the same top-of-the-line healthcare as members of Congress in four years!   Obama promised to take the record profits of big oil and “make” them reinvest in alternative energy sources and pay for pollution!  Obama promised good paying jobs for the jobless!  And for such a young man with little experience, Obama has done very well for himself in finding enough people to buy into the hype with their votes.

First, Obama does not seem to appreciate that education, especially higher education is something that should be earned through hard work, dedication and personal sacrifice.  What kind of a birthright is Obama talking about?  What kind of message does that send to slackers in high schools across America if the government will ensure that you get a college degree whether you’ve earned it or not?  How many excellent future graduates will then have their degrees discounted because the market is flooded and employers can’t determine whether these degrees represent any significant achievement?  Obama doesn’t understand that promising government-backed college education does not raise the bar, it lowers the bar for everyone.  Obama doesn’t understand that information, i.e. education,  is a commodity that students buy and that college education is an investment in yourself that shouldn’t be passed out to people who haven’t earned the privilege.

Second, Obama doesn’t appreciate the fact that compared to private sector compensation, full-time civil servants and elected officials in the Federal government typically make far less money in public service. One of the incentives to retain well-trained and competent employees and leaders is to provide an excellent healthcare incentive package.  The idea that EVERY American should be entitled to the same government healthcare benefits package is simply pandering for votes.  So, why work for the government anymore?  And more importantly, Obama’s plan cannot work well simply because healthcare services are limited and finite.  Anyone who has visited an emergency room lately already knows this.  If the government begins footing the medical bills of every American and disregarding the limited resources available and increasing the demand on our skilled medical professionals, we will be begging for the days of the 3 1/2 hour emergency room waiting experience.  Further, individuals will have less incentive to be proactive in maintaining their own health (quitting smoking for example) because medical bills will be a thing of the past.  (Well, not exactly, but I’ll get to that.)

Third, the evil “big oil” corporations.  Since when is actually making money such a problem in America?  I really don’t understand how people in cafes can complain about $3.75 per gallon gas while simultaneously paying $64.00 per gallon for their lattes with tipping to boot. Think about it.  We hear a lot about big, bad, American oil corporations and their outrageous profits, but Starbucks is making out like a bandit!  And Obama needs to brush up on corporate formation.  Last time I checked, it’s the shareholders, i.e. regular Americans, who actually own these companies and invest in them!  Obama promises to punish these oil companies for excessive profits, force them to reinvest in other energy sources and make them pay for global pollution.  So Obama’s policies will actually punish the investors, i.e. you and me!  So what’s the point in investing in stocks or mutual funds of American companies if the government is going to limit your opportutnities to amass wealth or save for retirement?  IT IS OUTRAGEOUS that Obama is going to take profits from hard-working, investing Americans and claim that he will help us and the economy by doing so. The government already rakes in billions of dollars with a “B” through corporate taxes and fuel taxes.  If you wish to revive the American economy, the answer cannot be found in punishing with EVEN MORE TAXES the very industries driving the economy in the first place.  Furthermore, Obama doesn’t explain why American oil companies should have to pay for global pollution but not other countries such as Mexico, India, and China. 

Finally, Obama promises good paying jobs (not good jobs) for the jobless–all 5% of them.  This can only mean one thing: raising the minimum wage.  If you haven’t already figured this out, artificially raising wages decreases the overall standard of living because prices rise as well.  You have “more” money, it just has less value.  So rather than raise the bar for everyone and strengthen the economy, minimum wages discount everyone’s dollar–all 100% of us.  Thanks, Barack!  So while a jobless person may find a new job, it won’t necessarily be worth it.  The taxes taken out of their pay check to fund American college educations, universal health insurance, global warming initiatives, and massive job programs won’t leave much after the bills are paid.  And any money left over won’t be worth investing in companies since profits are evil.  So Obama’s policies won’t be free at all.  All of us will pay much higher taxes, have much greater dependence on government and have less money and fewer opportunities for ourselves and our families.

So Obama really knows how to work a crowd and get people excited about “change” even though no one really seems to understand that change can be very, very, bad.  He appears to many as a political saviour, yet his policies only represent the tired old liberal ideas that have never worked.  Obama has the least experience of any Presidential candidate in modern times.  I ask you, “How is that change we can believe in?”

Vote for Obama! It’s easier than thinking! 

“Marriage” Means Something

Ellen’s position is that marriage only between a man and a woman violates her inalienable or Constitutional rights or her right to pursue happiness. But this is simply not the case. Gays and Lesbians have NEVER been denied the right to marriage in America based on sexual orientation! (That I am aware of.) Any man, gay or straight, can marry any other woman gay or straight. This has always been the law and the case as long as those individuals have met the other requirements for marriage such as consent, age and not being genetically related, etc.

Just show me one instance of a man wishing to marry a woman either of whom were denied the right to marry each other because either one or both were homosexual. Continue reading

Is Wright Right?

Soundbytes are not usually fair representations of significant issues and always inappropriate when used out of context.  He who has ears to hear, let him hear what these two pastors are saying: 

followed by this…

Now that you’ve heard more from these pulpits, does that change your perspective?  One is Obama’s pastor.  One is McCain’s spiritual advisor.  If only Obama would change his position on abortion, then he would at least be consistent with the overall message given by these ministers.  I’ve got to admit, that while I feel very blessed to be an American, I also don’t always feel that America deserves God’s blessing.  I think most people can understand that distinction.  After watching these longer clips, I’m reminded of the necessity for prayer on my knees, “God save America.”  

NARAL and Other Conservatives Don’t Like McCain

NARAL president Nancy Keenan emailed her supporters early on Wednesday asking for money for a campaign to begin bashing John McCain for his pro-life voting record on abortion. She didn’t waste any time in launching the attack as, later in the day, NARAL issued a press release blasting the possible Republican nominee.

Keenan said she’s worried that some people on the conservative side who disagree with McCain on other political issues will make it appear to some voters that he’s not “extreme in his opposition” to abortion.

John McCain has a 25-year record of voting against women’s freedom and privacy, and he has even gone so far as to call for the overturn of Roe v. Wade,” Keenan said.McCain served in the U.S. House for from 1983 to 1986 and in the U.S. Senate since 1987. During that time, Keenan said her organization has given him only a 4 percent pro-abortion voting record — including a rating of 0 from 2002 through 2007.

According to NARAL, McCain has voted pro-life 123 times out of 128 votes, for a 96 percent pro-life voting record.Keenan said McCain has a “documented record of hostility toward” abortion and that, on pro-life issues, “McCain is neither a moderate nor a maverick.”

“As we move toward the general election, NARAL Pro-Choice America will make sure that voters, especially pro-choice Independent and Republican women, know the truth about Sen. McCain,” Keenan promised.

Despite her criticism, McCain has said he’s proud of his pro-life voting record when it comes to abortion issues.

“I have many, many votes and it’s been consistent. And I’ve got a consistent zero from NARAL throughout all those years,” he told National Review in March 2007.

“And I think the important thing is you look at people’s voting record because sometimes rhetoric can be a little… misleading,” he added.

Washington, DC (LifeNews.com)

by Steven Ertelt LifeNews.com Editor February 7, 2008 

 Strange bedfellows indeed. –Jay