Posts Tagged ‘Obama’

Isn’t funny how people can figure out what kind of person you are, how you grew up, etc just from one political comment? It’s uncanny how accurate they are!

For example: during the 2008 presidential campaign I made a comment on a blog on Myspace that I didn’t support Obama because I don’t agree with his stance on several issues (for the record I supported Ron Paul. When he didn’t get the nomination, I voted McCain *ugh*). Well this one reader of the blog took it upon herself to call me out. And rightfully so. I never would have seen the light if not for her.

Turns out it wasn’t because I believed in a different political/economic ideology because of all the research I had done up to that point. No, it was because I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth, I’m rich, have had everything handed to me on a silver platter, and I don’t care about the little people or those that are suffering.

How very accurate! At that point, I dropped to my knees & prayed for the Lord to forgive me for my sins!

Ok, if you’re not getting the sarcasm by now, seek help. Also, read on to learn about my childhood.

I was born in 1979. If I remember the story correctly, I was 2 or 3 weeks premature (got my picture taken with Miss Tennessee, though, so it was worth it). I spent a couple weeks in an incubator because my lungs were underdeveloped & I would forget to breathe.

My dad, albeit jokingly (I hope), has credited my hospital stay as part of the reason my parents filed bankruptcy (also, the economy sucked back then, too). I vaguely remember living in a trailer in the middle of town, briefly. When I was 4, we (me, Mom, Dad, & my brother) moved in with my grandparents, who lived in a very, very small house. 

There was a living room, kitchen, (I think) 2 bedrooms, 1 bathroom…for 6 people (was used for several more when Dad was raised there. Big family). I didn’t care how big it was or the condition it was in (the uneven floor made roller skating, in one room, easy). 

I didn’t realize it at the time, but Mom & Dad took out loans for a Christmas or two, just so me & my brother would enjoy it (I miss my little yellow 4-wheeler). We never wanted for anything. We had clothes, a roof, loving parents, food…but we were far from well-off.

I made friends at school & little league. I fought with my brother. Got in trouble. Blah blah blah.

Am I leaving some stuff out? Yeah. But you won’t get my life story here.

My point is: don’t think you know someone from one comment they make about anything. I have friends who make racist jokes. Are they racist? No. Insensitive, maybe, but not racist. I have friends/family who are Democrats. Are they facist, socialist, commie pigs? Of course not. Though we disagree politically (which makes for great conversations), we know we are both good people. We’ve just had different life experiences that led to different conclusions.

So obviously I wasn’t born with a silver spoon in my mouth. Things aren’t handed to me on a silver platter. I’m most definitely not rich (I’ve been unemployed for 11 months now). I do care about the poor, which I am, and those that are suffering. I just believe a truly free market is the way to promote income mobility & alleviate suffering. Will there be assholes who take advantage of the disadvantaged in a free economy? Of course. But the market, IMO, would deal with them. 

Yes, Ayn Rand is the source of my main belief that “Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.” (from The Ayn Rand Institute). This belief fuels my other beliefs.

In conclusion: I am not a Godless heathen who cares only about himself. I am a God-fearing man who believes rational selfishness and adherance to the truth benefits everyone, not just the one. For future personal attacks on me, please refer to this post before being an anonymous hit-and-run commenter.Haters

Advertisements

Obama vs Fox News

Posted: June 19, 2009 in Uncategorized
Tags: , , , ,

Something tells me Obama hasn’t been watching Fox News. He seems to think they don’t do any positive stories on him. Time for your wake-up call, Mr. President.

I watch FN two to three hours daily. I’ve seen several commentators, such as Alan Colmes, Lamont Hill, Juan Williams, Brett Baier, Megyn Kelly, Glenn Beck, and even Bill O’Reilly defend your position on several issuses. Most notably, the decision not to release the “torture” photos. By my guess (and it’s only a guess), the stories on FN are about 43% in your favor, around 50% against, and 7% neutral.

So why do you say they don’t run favorable stories about you? Is it because you want the world to forget that you’ve got the NYT in your back pocket? Do you want us to overlook your connection with GE through MSNBC (which has run around 70% of their stories in your favor)? Should we overlook the fact that GE CEO Jeff Immelt told his “reporters” not to run anything that painted you in a bad light?

The fact of the matter is that Fox News has been more fair in their reporting than any of the other cable news shows. I guess that’s why Bill O’Reilly has had the number on rated cable news show for over eight years. Just because they don’t drool over you doesn’t mean they don’t run stories that make you look good. They put you up on a pedestal when you gave the go ahead to take out the pirates a few months ago, even though I personally thought you should’ve done it sooner.

So before you go making accusations, perhaps you should get all the facts first. If you want to find people who really don’t like your policies, turn on SIRIUS 144. With Mark Levin, Mike Church, and several others, it’s hard to find one favorable story about you involving your policies. So if you wanna go after someone, go for them. Or better yet, come after me. Ninety percent of my blogs are anti- your policies.

Can someone please explain this to me? Obama  wants to cut $313 billion dollars from Medicare, Medicaid, and other programs to pay for health care reform. We’re gonna take money from health care to pay for health care? Isn’t this like the Fed buying Treasuries?

$110 billion will come from reducing scheduled increases in Medicare payments. $75 billion will come from “better pricing of Medicare drugs”. $22 billion will come from adjusting payment rates for physician imaging services and cutting waste, fraud, and abuse. But the most appalling thing in the article says that $106 billion will come from cutting payments to hospitals to treat uninsured patients. They assume those numbers of uninsured patients will decrease as health care reforms kick in. We’re going to take money for treating uninsured patients to pay for insurance for said patients? The money comes from the same place and goes to the same place. How is that a cut?

I read this in an article on Reuters (one of the few respectable news sources left), and I couldn’t believe it. Do they think we’re that stupid. Apparently they do, if you listen to Charlie Rangle. Reportedly, he doesn’t want us to concentrate on the cost of a single-payer health plan. He wants us to get used to the coverage first, then they’ll talk to us about the cost.

I am so sick and tired of these clowns in Washington telling us how we need to live our lives and what our money needs to go for. It’s time for a revolution. Not a French Revolution, but an American Revolution. Let me elaborate. Every two, four, and six years we have a revolution in this country…at the polls. No bloodshed. We peaceably voice our opinions and revolutionize this great country. Here’s a novel idea: instead of Democrats & Republicans, why not fill both houses with Libertarians and Independents? Democrats and Republicans are on the same team right now, with a few dissenters on both sides. This graph (which I drew, sorry for the poor quality) is exactly where we’re at right now: government_graphIs that where you want this country to be? If we keep giving them the power, then we’ll be all the way to the left, which is just as bad as all the way to the right. Here’s where we need to be:ideal_gov'tA little to the left, a little to the right: that’s perfectly fine. But when the pendulum swings to the extreme one way, it’s going to swing to the extreme the other way. Look what happened last weekend in the EU. Far right extremist groups won several seats because of the way the extreme left has been handling this crisis. So are you sure you want to keep giving the gov’t more power with health care, cap & trade, VAT’s (value added taxes), etc.?

With Obama naming so many czars (some say it’s sixteen while others say it’s closer to twenty-one) answerable only to him, can someone please tell me what’s happening to our system of checks and balances? Let me name off the ones I know of so far:

There’s a Great Lakes czar, an economic czar, regulatory czar, government performance czar, drug czar, terrorism czar, intelligence czar, urban affairs czar, technology czar, cyber czar, car czar, health czar, border czar, stimulus czar, pay czar (or compensation czar, whichever you prefer), Iran czar, and a bailout czar.

That’s seventeen so far, and those are just the ones I know of. Just to be clear, I got about twelve of them from Glenn Beck and the others from Thomson Reuters (who also named the ones Beck did). So back to my original question: since they only answer to the president, where are the checks and balances? Where’s the transparency we were promised during the campaign?

This all started, as far as I know, with FDR and his “dictators”. And then Nixon, good ol’ Tricky Dick himself, appointed the first “czar”. I heard yesterday how much money they will be in charge of but for the life of me I can’t remember the exact number or find it on the web, but I do know it was in the trillions of dollars. What’s next, a food czar? Or does that fall under the health czar’s jurisdiction? Maybe a home czar. Or perhaps a czar czar, someone in charge of all the czars? Wait, that would be Obama.

Answer me this: is he just overwhelmed by the many facets of his job? Or is this a power grab? Either way, this does not instill confidence in me. If he’s overwhelmed, I have a cure but it’s just too new, too radical. I don’t even think I can write it down. No, I must. I have to. Otherwise no one else will say it. Perhaps the federal government should start focusing solely on national security and commerce with other nations. There, it’s out. I know, it’s just too radical an idea. Damn me and my conservative ideology. Wait a minute, that’s not conservative ideology. It’s closer to libertarian. But more than that, it’s what our founders had in mind when they broke away from the repression of Britain.

How have we gotten so far away from this ideology? Many people blame progressives, starting with Teddy Roosevelt. I’m not sure. I don’t know much about progressives, but I soon will. I don’t know who to blame, but I know that there is no provision in the Constitution allowing for the circumvention of our system of checks and balances, which is what these czars do. No one in the government should be answerable to only one person. If you believe they should be, may the Lord have mercy on us all.

They say he flip-flopped. You say he caved. I say he listened.
Republicans are saying that even though Obama made the right decision in the end, he did it for the wrong reasons. Democrats are saying that we should have more transparency (which I agree with, but not in this instance).
I say he listened to his national security advisors and military leaders.obama

They don’t want the photos released. You do. I say don’t do it.
Republicans don’t want the photos released because they would be used as recruitment tools for terrorists and fuel hatred towards America.
Democrats say their civil liberties were violated so therefor the photos should be released.
I agree with the Republican argument, but I’ll also add that those responsible for the actions in those pictures have been investigated and punished accordingly so releasing the photos would accomplish nothing.

Why is this even an issue? When Obama’s own national security advisers say releasing the photos will put Americans in harms way and military leaders say it will put our troops in even more danger, what is there to argue about? Why am I stuck defending Obama, from the left and right? This is an awkward position for me. This is like the third or fourth time since his inauguration I’ve had to defend him, and I don’t even like him!

I believe he made the right call (you have no idea how hard it is for me to say that). If put in his shoes, seeing the intelligence he sees daily, what call would you make? That, unfortunately, is a question we can’t answer because we don’t  see the intelligence he does. This is a call I’m going to trust him to make. Hopefully he’ll classify the images so they won’t be leaked. And if they’re leaked before they’re classified, I hope the guilty parties pay a huge fine.

I’ve recently finished reading Common Sense and for the life of me I can’t see how anyone can support the current (and previous) administrations “ambitious” spending. Take this quote from Paine: “…security being the true design and end of government, it unanswerably follows that whatever form thereof appears more likely to ensure it to us, with the least expense and greatest benefit, is preferable to all others.” Least expense and greatest benefit…

Oh, how about this quote which can be used to argue against the recent stimulus, omnibus, and FY 2010 budget, among others: “the more simple any thing is, the less liable it is to be disordered, and the easier repaired when disordered.” Well, Mr. Paine thought simplicity was best. Too bad our congressmen and women have forgotten this common sense argument. Take the recent 900+ page bill where Chairman Waxman hired a speed reader to read the bill. The highway act in the ’50’s, in comparison, which transformed the country, was just over 20 pages.

Perhaps these politicians should pay close attention to these next two quotes: “Of more worth is one honest man to society, and in the sight of God, than all the crowned ruffians that ever lived.” Honesty, what a concept. There are no honest politicians anymore. Just politicians. I really like this one: “…he will not put off the true charcter of a man, and generously enlarge his views beyond the present day.” Look past the now and into the future…present actions have future consequences.

How about this: “Is the power which is jealous of our prosperity, a proper power to govern us? Whoever says no to this question is an independent, for independency means no more than whether we shall make our own laws, or, whether the king, the greatest enemy this continent hath, or can have, shall tell us, ‘there shall be no laws but such as I like.'”

Another favorite: “He that will promote discord, under a government so equally formed as this, would have joined Lucifer in his revolt.” This goes for all Democrats (Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, Obama, etc) and Republicans (Limbaugh, Hannity, W., Cheney, etc.) who pit one party against the other. Here’s an idea: instead of pointing the finger at the other guy, why not actually try to fix the problems facing this country? “The science of the politician consists in fixing the true point of happiness and freedom. Those men would deserve the gratitude of ages, who should discover a mode of government that contained the greatest sum of individual happiness with the least national expense.”

“The present state of America is truly alarming to every man who is capable of reflection.” “Our present condidtion is, legislation without law, wisdom without a plan, a constitution without a name, and…perfect independence contending for dependence.” Never were truer words spoken. We have an intrusive, or progressive, government who acts like they want to dictate our every move, from what kind of car we drive to what job we have to what kind of healthcare we have. Let the private sector do what it does best, and that is take care of itself.

These are just a few quotes from a masterpiece written by Thomas Paine, Common Sense. Every argument against what our government is doing, and has been since Teddy Roosevelt, is in this book. The reason our ancestors left England was to escape power hungry rulers whose only interest was ruling over their subjects, not ensuring their happiness. What we have now, and have had since Teddy, is that kind of government, with a few exceptions along the way.

Of the three unalienable rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence, two have been violated by the current and previous administrations, Bush and Obama. Our right to liberty no longer exists. The government spends our money @ an alarming rate without our consent. They’re also spending our childrens and grandchildrens money. California woke up the other day and told the state “Hell no, you’re not taking any more of our money. As a matter of fact, you’re not getting a raise.” I never thought I’d hear myself say this, but we should follow California’s example.

Our right to pursue happiness is gone as well. Because of the massive spending by the government, meant to save jobs, I’ll be unemployed by August or September. The government has added over 70,000 jobs. Just so you know, our tax dollars pay for those jobs. I have some questions: How will they pay for those jobs when unemployment tops 10%? With the government adding jobs while the private sector sheds jobs, how are they going to pay for those extra programs and workers? You don’t think they’ll raise taxes do you? How am I free to pursue my own happiness when I’m paying for others to pursue theirs?

I’ll leave you with this: How can you solve problems caused by too much borrowing and spending with more borrowing and spending? “…by a plain method of argument, as we are running the next generation into debt, we ought to do the work of it, otherwise we use them meanly and pitifully.”

National Prayer Day

Posted: May 7, 2009 in politics, religion
Tags: , , ,

So, today was National Prayer Day. A day that former Pres. Bush celebrated publicly. Pres. Obama chose to do so in private. Should you care? Yes.

But why should you care? Read the Bible, specifically Matthew 6:1 – 6:15. Keep it private. Don’t be a hypocrite. So in this instance, I agree with Obama. Everyone should let this go and stop making a big deal about it.