Barack Hussein Obama: His Ideas for Change and Hope
Authors Name Withheld
August, 2008
We've heard a lot of hype over the last year about Barack Obama. But who is he? What does he stand for, and what will he do for our country? I want to take a look at some of the facts to understand what his policies are and how they could affect us all.
Barack was involved for 20 years in a "Black Power" church whose influence is strongly evident in his own book "Audacity of Hope" in which he refers to the idea of "…disowning his own white grandmother…" and the cultural difference in which he believes whites are engrained to "hate" blacks. The book offers a window into the mind of Obama, where his own stereotypes and reverse racism become uncomfortably known.
His political achievements are limited in number and significance, and he is known almost exclusively for his ability to speak. While this is an important quality, certainly experience and leadership are much more important for the top executive level position. Furthermore, the little experience he does have is heavily on the legislative side, rather than the executive branch.
Obama has no record of "crossing the aisle" or working in a non-partisan way. When asked of an example where he was willing to comprise or work with Republicans, he cited a bill that he worked with McCain to put together. However, he forgot to mention that when it came to voting, Obama yielded back to his party and voted against the legislation.
Obama shows his hypocrisy on numerous issues.
1. He was adamantly against the war, stating all along he would immediately start pulling troops from Iraq and have them out within a stated timeline. Over the course of the last 16 months, he has continued to extend that time table period, and this summer (after making his first trip to Iraq in over 3 years to view progress), he had totally changed his withdrawal position to state that he would consider the circumstances and requests of the Iraqi government before adhering to specific withdrawal timelines.
2. He has called out the Clintons and others for playing the race card, when he himself has had strong ties with a "black power" church and displays reverse racism in his book "Audacity of Hope".
3. With the announcement by John McCain of Sarah Palin for his VP choice, Obama has chided McCain for picking someone with "lack of experience." Sarah has just as much, if not more leadership experience than Obama, including several years at the executive level as a Governor. As such, the GOP #2 pick is as much if not more so qualified than the Democrats #1 pick.
Obama has campaigned on "hope" and "change", neither of which offer any real solutions or substance. So what are we exactly hoping and changing for? By looking at his record and his stated goals, we can expect the following:
A) More government regulations. This will directly lead to more government control, eroding the freedom of the people.
B) Higher taxes for all. While he states he only wants to raise taxes on the "rich", the types of taxes he plans to increase will affect the great majority of working adults. Anyone who has a private retirement plan or investments in the markets can expect tax increases. Social security tax increases will affect millions of middle class earners. Higher gasoline tax proposals will affect anyone who drives or rides public transportation.
C) Increased inflation. Any time the federal government attempts to meddle with fiscal policy, increase subsidies, raise taxes, implement price controls, or prop up the lower class on the backs of the rest - they are directly causing inflationary price adjustments.
D) Shredding of the Constitution. Democrats have accused Republicans of stomping on the Constitution, but they are only pointing to specific policies relating to the Iraq war which they falsely claim are non-constitutional. The war was properly authorized by Congress, and received full authority of the UN as Iraq had violated 16 UN resolutions. While the severity of the threat may not have been to the level that was initially suspected by the intelligence of multiple countries, the fact remains they were indeed still a threat, and in serious violation of multiple resolutions that gave the authority for war. The other major issue that has been brought up is the topic of torture. Torture is not sanctioned by the federal government, and any isolated acts of torture by our forces do not implicate the President for Constitutional violation.
Now that we have that cleared up - the propositions of Obama to further expand federal power over state power is in fact not Constitutional. Those types of policies are in direct violation the separation of power between federal and state government. The additional redistribution of wealth and socialism that Obama desires is an infringement on our personal freedoms guaranteed by the constitution. Some examples include nationalized healthcare, windfall profit taxes and gun control - all of which are gross abuses of power and violate Constitutional authority.
E) Economic turmoil. We have already suffered the mortgage meltdown - but the more our government tries to interfere, the worse it will be. If Obama is able to pursue his socialistic policies to offer additional entitlement programs, government subsidies, unionized benefit packages, etc. (paid for through higher taxes), then we will see a decrease in productivity, as well as a much faster increase in out-sourcing as more companies such as Ford and GM suffer severe losses at home. These policies essentially require American companies to pay more to get less work. Motivation for entrepreneurialism and company growth are impeded and the entire economy snowballs into trouble. These core economic principles are proven time and again, but because their cause and effect are always delayed, it is very difficult to see the direct impact because we are such a "in the moment" society. (Update, October: the mortgage meltdown grew increasingly worse in Sept./Oct. The socialistic policies supported by the democrats to push for sub-prime lending for under qualified borrowers helped get us here.)
F) Human rights destruction. Obama said that determining when someone qualifies for human rights is "above his pay grade". He was referring to infants at the time, but as we travel down this slope, this will in time begin to affect the elderly, the handicapped and others who may be declared not well enough to deserve basic human rights, or even the right to life. Obama was not just referring to abortion. A few years ago, Obama voted against a law that was designed to protect a baby that was born alive during an abortion procedure. This was after hearing testimony from nurses that would cradle live babies for extended periods of time while they were just left to die after surviving the horrific abortion process. He has also stated that the need for an abortionist to get the approval of another doctor is an interference to the process of the decision of a mother to abort a baby. So, at what point is a baby no longer dispensable? Obama still doesn't know. Is your grandmother expendable? If we can't define life, how can we protect and defend it? The absolute core responsibility of federal government is to protect its citizens. Under Obama, this core function will take a back seat to violating the Constitution.
G) Poor healthcare. A select few in this country, such as Michale Moore, actually believe we have poor quality healthcare in this country. They point to the service they got in Cuba and other "lesser" countries. In truth, the quality of our healthcare is so great, that many of the worlds most powerful leaders and wealthy people will come here when they are truly ill. Yes, you may get free basic healthcare in Europe and other parts of the world, but the quality of service and recovery rates are clearly not what we have here. How many Canadians or Europeans do you know that have had MRI scans? Knee or hip replacements? Heart by-pass? Sure, if they break a leg, they won't have to give up their other leg just to pay for fixing the broken one. But, consider that they don't have nearly the number of high-cost services that we as Americans are almost addicted to. We have the latest in cutting edge technologies and we probably use it more than we should. We get more regular checkups, more medical visits for relatively minor ailments and more medications than those other countries.
This "luxury healthcare" comes at a price. Take into account our excessive use of medical facilities, and add to it the shameful cost of liability insurance that our doctors have to pay to cover lawsuits from folks like former Presidential candidate John Edwards and then the third poisonous ingredient of government regulations and its no wonder our healthcare costs have gone through the roof. If we want the best, the latest and greatest - if we want it even when we don't need it, and then if we want to sue anytime something goes wrong, then yes, we are going to pay a heavy price for it. The government, as always, just makes it worse, not better. When they require medical staff to drown in paperwork rather than work with patients, that costs precious millions at every hospital, clinic and doctors office across the country.
Medical expenses continue to increase for three reasons; the latest and greatest technologies, frivolous lawsuits, and increased government regulations. Subsidized health insurance costs taxpayers more money, and drives up insurance costs for the simple reason that when this expensive, quality healthcare is used in excess by insured people who are not paying for their insurance, the insurance companies are forced to increase premiums to cover costs.
Nationalized healthcare would allow "free" access to the system, encouraging more unnecessary visits to the hospital, driving up government subsidized payments, thereby increasing our tax payments to cover it. Reduced quality will follow, to help lower costs and reduce the costs to government. It becomes a lose-lose situation. Therefore, the free market system where people pay for what they need, will be best to keep quality medical care affordable. The government always has, and always will help with those who need medical treatment. By minimizing abuses in the system and the "entitlement" mentality, we can do a lot to reduce costs. Nationalization will just hide these costs. In 15 years we would look back and wonder what happened to healthcare in this country and why do our taxes grow increasingly higher.
H) Failed Social Security. Anyone 45 years and younger will never be able to retire with any social security benefits, even though we will be paying more into the system. Obama wants to increase middle class payments into the Social Security system and refuses to privatize or even partially-privatize the funds. The Social Security fund is already broke, and will be losing more money than is sustainable by the 2030s. If this money were privately invested, not only would the system become solvent, it could return a profit, increase payout benefits and reduce pay-in requirements.
I) Bullying by the world. If a brutal thug came to you and his only goal was to kill you, not rob you, would you want to negotiate with him? Or would you rather neutralize him first? Obama wants to concede to the bullying of thugs in Iran, North Korea and elsewhere. Rather than to show strength and stand up to these countries, he is content to allow our country to be mocked and pushed around. The world hasn't lost its respect for us because of our liberation in Iraq. In fact, for the first year after our mission, we were held in regard and in fearful respect . Other parts of the Middle East even began handing over illegal weapons to ensure we didn't attack them as well. But then the world began hearing the contempt of the Democrats, such as Obama. They saw the weakness in their attitude, the self-deprecating attitude that they held, and they realized our own politicians would crack the will of the people. They began to get brave - North Korea and Iran pushing the limits to see what we would do. Russian acting out in aggression to our allies. The world has indeed lost its respect and fear of us. Not, however, because of President Bush, but because of leaders like Barack Obama.
J) Energy crisis. He has opposed nuclear energy and offshore drilling. You'll notice that since President Bush lifted the oil ban, that oil prices have steadily dropped. (Update, October.: Congress has now also lifted their offshore drilling ban and oil has plummeted even further - nearly half of the July 2008 high.) Yet he wants to spend hundreds of billions of dollars on inefficient alternative energies. At what price can we afford these alternative energies, especially when each harbor their own harmful side effects? More information can be found by clicking Oil Truths
K) Global Warming panic. More scientific evidence is coming out to suggest that CO2 levels actually follow, not lead a rise in temperatures. Many climatologists support the idea that solar activity has more to do with climate change than man-made pollution. For more information , click the link for Climate Change: Fact. Vs. Fiction.
L) Worse Education. Our education system was meant to be controlled locally, not federally. Existing federal expansion has helped to lead to current deficits in funding. He claims that college is a "right", rather than a privilege. Throwing more money at the problem won't make it better, but giving back local control will! Government should not be subsidizing more college, it's not their role nor is it prudent to continue to tax us for it. Also he states that "it's the right thing to do" to teach sex education in Kindergarten.
Return to: ThinkingAgain.com