Okay I'm aware that at this point I'm just coming across like I'm ready to snipe this guy out but honestly that's not the case. People keep telling me that I should stand behind Obama because he's going to give ALL AMERICANS healthcare. He's going to get more QUALIFIED teachers in high need schools. He's going to BRING OUR TROOPS BACK. He's going to IMPROVE the NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT. He's America's HOPE for the FUTURE.
Do you know what i say to that?
HOW????
How does he plan on doing all of these great things?!?! Does he have a magical genie that will make all of theses things suddenly happen? Did his fairy godmother grant him three wishes?!?!? Or is he going to bring to America the most biggest tax increase any of us have ever known. I don't know what world you Obama supporters are living in but in my world, this world, money DOES NOT fall out of the sky!!!!
In order to give healthcare to a sickly, possibly dying, old lady, another old lady, the paragon of health, has to dig into her empty purse and whip out some money that she could be using to take care of herself.
Call it selfishness, call it greed; if I'm working hard and scraping up my dollars I'm not handing out my cash to save some lady I've never even met before. I could be feeding my kids with that.
But once more, I am digressing. If anyone can answer my question of How with a clear solid answer I will cease with my seemingly "anti-Obama" blogs.
Obama is touted as the 'change' we so desperately need in this country. Yet REAL change might encompass tax relief for the working class, not additional taxes to fund poverty programs in OTHER CONTINENTS when our own population is struggling to make ends meet while being forced to give HALF of their hard-earned income to the IRS (see the senate.gov website and search IL-Obama to see his recent support for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's multi-billion dollar, opportunistic aid package for politically advantageous African nations).
REAL change might encompass not FORCING everyone to accept a Universal Health Care package that by its very design will likely provide terrible care and coverage but rather making health care affordable enough that poor families can still afford to care for themselves when they are sick, with or without a costly insurance plan (this could take the form of subsidies or tax credits for obtaining a medical plan, sanctions on the medical, pharmaceutical, and insurance industries to provide low-cost care and alternative, caps on inflation for medical supplies, medications, and cost of care, and the list goes on).
REAL change might encompass not repeatedly voting to authorize additional war spending in the Congress while getting out a sound byte or two paying lip service to troop withdrawal and your overall disapproval of the war. Apparently a Barack selling point is his clear stance against the war from the "start"...yeah, when he wasn't even a Senator yet! His voting record in all Senate bills regarding the war does NOT reflect an anti-war view. Plus, his conspicuous absence from several recent key votes on revisions to the Protect America Act and prior support of the Constitution-crushing Patriot Act belie not a politician bent on changing the system, as he and supporters claim, but a politician flinging a lot of empty rhetoric while his vote records sing a very different tune.
I've written a bit about Barack in my blog - www.progressiveu.org/blog/twilightzarathustra - and I'm encouraging all 'progressive' youth to do some actual research on this candidate that they so blindly back. Many might be surprised - as I was, coming from a liberal Democratic background - that they may sympathize more with conservatives (gasp!) when it comes to economic policy, taxation, defense of our country, and the size and scope of government. Barack may be a popular fad with momentum, but he's in bed with the good ole boys just as much as Hitler-y and McCan't.
Thanks for posting about this. I'm from Chicago and people act like they wanna crucify me when I critique Obama. But no one ever researches his voting track record or his substance beyond his desire to 'change the government', 'change the country'. I've got a change in mind - scale it back! No additional legislature or taxation is the key to fixing what is very clearly broken. People forget that 'liberal' doesn't mean 'liberty' - it means government has a more and more liberal dose of regulation for its citizens every day. It's dangerous, unnecessary, and, often, unconstitutional.
- Jessica
Obama is really a great speaker, but he neglects to say HOW he will make all these changes. Even on his website, it is hard to find out the details of his plans. He may be "a vehicle for change", but I'd really like a better idea of what type of change he is a vehicle for. Sure, he may be able to "unite" Americans, but will the thing uniting us be sky-high taxes? If so, I am not sure I am for a united America.
If we assume Huckabee to be almost eliminated then the choices of Hillary, McCain, or Obama all share the same shortcomings you list. Under that assumption I would choose Obama as the least corrupted by Washington experience.
He may need to provide more of a platform to win the general election, but doing so if he is leading, or gaining support faster than his rivals would be foolish on his part.
A Fact is Always Better Than an Ideal.
So its foolish to keep your voting public aware of how much they would have to spend if they vote for you?
Interesting, on behalf of all other candidates in the 2008 election i want to thank you. Barack Obama is now OFFICIALLY NOT an option. Not only do i NOT support him,but now I will even campaign AGAINST him because if an untainted man is too shady to disclose where he gets his funding from i dont even KNOW what that says about the rest of the politicians. As a matter of fact im almost tempted to be one of those who doesnt vote and just give their vote to the rest of America. Thank you for your show of ignorance.
~wrds r meant 2 b heard, so keep ur ears open!!!!~
He can't win, partially because he has stated exactly what he would do on dozens of issues, and almost everyone, myself included, disagree with him on at least one of those definite positions. You may agree with him on many, or even most of his clear firm positions, he is for smaller government and reducing spending as you are, but I'm guessing that something he stands for is enough to disqualify him with you as with most voters.
This simple fact leads to politicians being a little hard to nail down on specifics. They are not this way by nature, just neccesity. If they give people too much to find fault with they are not employed in politics, because they lose elections.
If you are waiting for an open honest politician with a chance of winning you may never vote in the USA.
---
"Thank you for your show of ignorance."
Sometimes people that disagree with you also know more than you do. They can still be wrong, but calling them ignorant might just look like you are lacking a rational argument yourself.
A Fact is Always Better Than an Ideal.