Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Monday, April 6, 2009
"Here's Your TARP Money Back." "Sorry, You Have to Keep It."
Take a moment to read Stuart Varney's editorial here. After you have done that, take another moment and write your congressmen (again!), asking them to accept the return of the money.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Now This IS The Change We Need
No, I did not vote for President Obama. In fact, anyone reading previous entries on this blog will note how strongly I spoke out against him. But, he is now my President and I will respect his leadership. However, I will NOT blindly follow him simply because the media (and everyone else) says he is "The One".
His first 2 weeks in office may have been the worse first 2 weeks for any Chief Executive with the possible exception of President William Henry Harrison. Now, he invokes "fear" in his attempt to push through the "Stimulus" package which does not stimulate anything but government growth. Mr. President, the only fear I have is that the Senate might actually pass this bill and you would sign it.
If you have listened to the media hype you get the impression this bill solves all the nation's financial ills. Nonsense. It will put us in debt forever and further impact our economy. Someone, in an attempt to help us visualize the amount of money proposed in this bill (around one trillion dollars), has said the amount of money in the bill is equal to spending one million dollars a day from the time of Christ until now! And we, the taxpayers now and future (i.e., our children, our grandchildren), will have to pay it back!
Others have highlighted what type of spending is actually in the bill so I won't do that here. The bottom line is the bill passed by the House, being debated in the Senate, and demanded, via scare tactics, by our President is the wrong approach.
The CHANGE we need in terms of a stimulus bill has been clearly articulated by Governor Mitt Romney here. I would encourage you to read it. Then I EXHORT you to call or e-mail your Senators, tell them to forget amending this bill, and, instead, throw it out and look for a completely different approach, an approach which will HELP our economy rather than destroy it. Call/write them everyday until this bill is passed or, hopefully, is defeated.
May God have mercy on our nation.
His first 2 weeks in office may have been the worse first 2 weeks for any Chief Executive with the possible exception of President William Henry Harrison. Now, he invokes "fear" in his attempt to push through the "Stimulus" package which does not stimulate anything but government growth. Mr. President, the only fear I have is that the Senate might actually pass this bill and you would sign it.
If you have listened to the media hype you get the impression this bill solves all the nation's financial ills. Nonsense. It will put us in debt forever and further impact our economy. Someone, in an attempt to help us visualize the amount of money proposed in this bill (around one trillion dollars), has said the amount of money in the bill is equal to spending one million dollars a day from the time of Christ until now! And we, the taxpayers now and future (i.e., our children, our grandchildren), will have to pay it back!
Others have highlighted what type of spending is actually in the bill so I won't do that here. The bottom line is the bill passed by the House, being debated in the Senate, and demanded, via scare tactics, by our President is the wrong approach.
The CHANGE we need in terms of a stimulus bill has been clearly articulated by Governor Mitt Romney here. I would encourage you to read it. Then I EXHORT you to call or e-mail your Senators, tell them to forget amending this bill, and, instead, throw it out and look for a completely different approach, an approach which will HELP our economy rather than destroy it. Call/write them everyday until this bill is passed or, hopefully, is defeated.
May God have mercy on our nation.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
The Stimulus Package
For those of you who are following the "stimulus" package passed by the House and now on the way to the Senate, you might be interested in a few facts.
1. The stimulus package is a 647 page bill. Yes, 647 pages! If you want to read it or print off a copy, go here.
2. Despite what all the major news networks say, the majority of this package does nothing to create new jobs. Rather it contains many (and I mean many) pet projects of politicians. In other words, it is the largest spending bill every proposed in the history of our nation.
3. Our economy is weak right now and folks are losing their jobs. But comparing our current economic state to that of a Great Depression is a farce. Our situation is no where near as dire as it was then. Such language is used in an effort to get this package passed as soon as possible, even though the package will do little to help our economy.
When Franklin D. Roosevelt became President in 1933 at the height of the Great Depression, the unemployment rate nationwide was 24.9% (1 in 4 were without a job). At the end of 2008, the unemployment rate in the United States was 7.2%. Michigan and Rhode Island, at 10.6% and 10% respectively, were the largest. We are far from the situation of the Great Depression. Let's not over react but let's take time to analyze the situation and make good choices.
4. Furthermore, it has frequently been touted that Roosevelt's "New Deal" is what brought us out of the Great Depression. In his first 100 days, FDR rammed through Congress several new government programs with more over the next several years (including Social Security). We are told these great government programs conceived by FDR's "brain trust" pulled us out of the depression. Therefore, we need the government implementing similar programs today to save us.
Unfortunately, this is not true. In 2004, two UCLA economists released the results of a study which showed FDR's government programs actually prolonged the depression. Several articles have now revealed that World War II, NOT government programs, led to our nation's recovery. As Michael Fumento has written, "The grotesque reality is that it wasn’t an American aristocrat who led us out of the Great Depression but a monstrous Austrian corporal".
So, let's not put too much hope into our government to bail us out of this crisis. The more they get involved, the worse it will get for us and our children. Read over this bill and tell your Senators what you think of it. Point out to them the items in the bill you feel are of no value when it comes to creating jobs. Don't just shake your head and say, "Well, the President is for it so it must be good". That was the attitude of some back in the 30s.
1. The stimulus package is a 647 page bill. Yes, 647 pages! If you want to read it or print off a copy, go here.
2. Despite what all the major news networks say, the majority of this package does nothing to create new jobs. Rather it contains many (and I mean many) pet projects of politicians. In other words, it is the largest spending bill every proposed in the history of our nation.
3. Our economy is weak right now and folks are losing their jobs. But comparing our current economic state to that of a Great Depression is a farce. Our situation is no where near as dire as it was then. Such language is used in an effort to get this package passed as soon as possible, even though the package will do little to help our economy.
When Franklin D. Roosevelt became President in 1933 at the height of the Great Depression, the unemployment rate nationwide was 24.9% (1 in 4 were without a job). At the end of 2008, the unemployment rate in the United States was 7.2%. Michigan and Rhode Island, at 10.6% and 10% respectively, were the largest. We are far from the situation of the Great Depression. Let's not over react but let's take time to analyze the situation and make good choices.
4. Furthermore, it has frequently been touted that Roosevelt's "New Deal" is what brought us out of the Great Depression. In his first 100 days, FDR rammed through Congress several new government programs with more over the next several years (including Social Security). We are told these great government programs conceived by FDR's "brain trust" pulled us out of the depression. Therefore, we need the government implementing similar programs today to save us.
Unfortunately, this is not true. In 2004, two UCLA economists released the results of a study which showed FDR's government programs actually prolonged the depression. Several articles have now revealed that World War II, NOT government programs, led to our nation's recovery. As Michael Fumento has written, "The grotesque reality is that it wasn’t an American aristocrat who led us out of the Great Depression but a monstrous Austrian corporal".
So, let's not put too much hope into our government to bail us out of this crisis. The more they get involved, the worse it will get for us and our children. Read over this bill and tell your Senators what you think of it. Point out to them the items in the bill you feel are of no value when it comes to creating jobs. Don't just shake your head and say, "Well, the President is for it so it must be good". That was the attitude of some back in the 30s.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
"The Obama Agenda" by Jonah Goldberg
Jonah Goldberg, a columnist I almost always enjoy reading, has a great article on Glenn Beck's web site, posted yesterday shortly after President Obama's address. Here is a link to the web site containing Mr. Goldberg's thoughts.
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Congratulations President-Elect Obama
The following paragraphs form a letter I sent to our newly elected President this morning via e-mail. Given all my prior posts opposing him, I thought it only proper that I post this letter as well.
November 5, 2008
President-Elect Obama,
Congratulations on your campaign and your victory! Your election is further proof of the greatness of the United States of America!
I did not support your candidacy and did not vote for you yesterday. Your past legislative record and your remarks throughout your career alarm me. I have written blog entries and letters opposing you throughout the past few months and will continue to oppose the policies you outlined in the campaign. Nevertheless, I respect you as my next President and will pray for God to give you wisdom in your position as the leader of the free world.
Your election fulfills the dream of the Civil Rights movement. The African-American community, once slaves to white Americans and often punished and even killed as such, have now seen America erase that dark spot in the election of one of their own as President. Praise God such racial slavery has been removed from our nation! But, Mr. President-Elect, there still remains a civil rights battle in our country. There are still those in the United States who are in bondage and at the whim of their masters. They need their rights restored and I call on you as President-Elect to make this your number one priority. The group to whom I refer are our unborn children.
Every day in our nation since 1973, 4000 unborn Americans have their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness destroyed because their mother exercises her “freedom to choose”. The life of the mother, rape, and incest account for a small percentage (less than 5%) of the abortions performed in our country. Thousands of unborn Americans lose their right to life everyday at the hands of a mother who doesn’t want to be burdened by them.
Mr. President-Elect, women do not lose their “right to choose” if the practice of abortion is ended. When women engage in the sexual act they exercise their choice and must accept the possible consequences of that act, namely, a new, unborn American.
I call on you, President-Elect Obama, to lead the charge in our nation to eliminate the barbaric practice of killing our unborn citizens and, instead, to restore their right to live equally with other Americans.
Sincerely,
Bruce D. Walker
St. Charles, MO
November 5, 2008
President-Elect Obama,
Congratulations on your campaign and your victory! Your election is further proof of the greatness of the United States of America!
I did not support your candidacy and did not vote for you yesterday. Your past legislative record and your remarks throughout your career alarm me. I have written blog entries and letters opposing you throughout the past few months and will continue to oppose the policies you outlined in the campaign. Nevertheless, I respect you as my next President and will pray for God to give you wisdom in your position as the leader of the free world.
Your election fulfills the dream of the Civil Rights movement. The African-American community, once slaves to white Americans and often punished and even killed as such, have now seen America erase that dark spot in the election of one of their own as President. Praise God such racial slavery has been removed from our nation! But, Mr. President-Elect, there still remains a civil rights battle in our country. There are still those in the United States who are in bondage and at the whim of their masters. They need their rights restored and I call on you as President-Elect to make this your number one priority. The group to whom I refer are our unborn children.
Every day in our nation since 1973, 4000 unborn Americans have their right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness destroyed because their mother exercises her “freedom to choose”. The life of the mother, rape, and incest account for a small percentage (less than 5%) of the abortions performed in our country. Thousands of unborn Americans lose their right to life everyday at the hands of a mother who doesn’t want to be burdened by them.
Mr. President-Elect, women do not lose their “right to choose” if the practice of abortion is ended. When women engage in the sexual act they exercise their choice and must accept the possible consequences of that act, namely, a new, unborn American.
I call on you, President-Elect Obama, to lead the charge in our nation to eliminate the barbaric practice of killing our unborn citizens and, instead, to restore their right to live equally with other Americans.
Sincerely,
Bruce D. Walker
St. Charles, MO
Monday, November 3, 2008
Why Vote for Obama?
Over the weekend some folks asked me about the letter I sent to the editor of the St. Charles Journal which was published in the October 29. Here is the text of that letter.
So you are going to vote for Sen. Barack Obama. I congratulate you for exercising your right to vote.But before you do so, may I ask you one question? Why Obama? Change? He gives good speeches? He's young"?Consider the following:
So you are going to vote for Sen. Barack Obama. I congratulate you for exercising your right to vote.But before you do so, may I ask you one question? Why Obama? Change? He gives good speeches? He's young"?Consider the following:
- Sen. Obama has done nothing of significance in the Illinois or U.S. Senate.
- Sen. Obama has not reached across party lines in the past.
- Sen. Obama will raise taxes. Despite his claims, he always votes for tax increases.
- Sen. Obama will redistribute wealth, which, in turn, will raise prices and cost jobs.
- Sen. Obama will raise the capital gains tax, which will also raise prices and cost jobs.
- Sen. Obama will pull out of the Middle East and reduce our military strength.
- Sen. Obama supports the killing of the unborn. He supports partial birth abortion, an unnecessary and cruel practice.He also supports not caring for aborted babies who survive the abortion attempt.
- Sen. Obama will implement national health care requiring more taxes. Furthermore, when has the government ever successfully run any agency?
- Sen. Obama will not support new oil drilling or new nuclear plants in our country.
- Sen. Obama will appoint liberal justices who will legislate from the bench.
- Sen. Obama will give the Democrats control of both the legislative and executive branches of our government. Nothing will stop liberals from implementing their agenda.
Please vote. But, seriously, why Obama?
Thursday, October 23, 2008
The Patriarch's Pen: Election 2008, Article 3
This is my third blog post on the candidates for the Presidency in this year’s election. I have already presented my reasons why I will not vote for Senator Barack Obama as well as the various 3rd party candidates. The only candidate I have not discussed is Senator John McCain. He is the subject of this post.
First, let me be upfront on Senator McCain. He was not my choice for the Republican nomination during the primaries. I am not a John McCain fan. There are many reasons why I could vote against him. Here are a few:
1. McCain-Kennedy. This was the infamous “comprehensive” immigration bill which resulted in such a public outcry that it was wiped off the face of the earth. No matter what you call it, the bill was an amnesty bill and a major strike against Senator McCain.
2. McCain-Feingold. Supposedly a campaign reform bill, McCain-Feingold essentially helps incumbents maintain their seats.
3. McCain-Lieberman. The Climate Stewardship Act which would have depressed the economy more than saved the environment.
4. The Gang of 14. Senator McCain was one of the leaders of this informal group of 7 Republican and 7 Democrat Senators who worked together on President Bush’s justice appointments. In my humble opinion, Senator McCain was far TOO bi-partisan with this group, leaning toward the Democratic side way too often.
5. His energy position. Senator McCain has been against off shore drilling and drilling in ANWAR for some time. To his credit, he has changed his position on off shore drilling and now supports it since our nation badly needs this oil. I am hopeful Governor Palin, who supports drilling in ANWAR, will change his mind on that matter as well.
If Hilary Clinton had been the nominee running against John McCain, the above items would probably have driven me to vote for Chuck Baldwin even if that meant giving the Presidency to Clinton (believe me, that aggravates my stomach even to think about it). But Senator Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination, Senator Obama did. If there was another candidate more conservative than John McCain AND who could realistically defeat Barack Obama, I would vote for him. But, there isn’t. So I am left with John McCain.
My remarks should not be interpreted to imply there are no reasons why I would vote for him. He does have several positive stances with which I agree.
1. He is pro-life. As he stated at the Saddleback Forum earlier this year, Senator McCain believes life begins at conception. There have been concerns expressed over some of his views on cloning, but, when contrasted with Senator Obama’s radical view on the life of the unborn, Senator McCain’s position is outstanding.
2. He is pro-military. Senator McCain argued for some time to expand the size of our forces in Iraq and he has been proven correct in that assessment. Foreign leaders know McCain as President is not someone who will back away from a fight. Even more importantly, Senator McCain supports the military and understands the need for strong technology for the defense of our country. Again, his position compared to Senator Obama’s position is like day and night. Obama’s desire is to reduce the military, McCain’s is to strengthen it.
3. He is against pork barrel spending. Although I am disappointed with his vote to approve the most recent bail out package to which the Democrats attached some pork barrel spending, Senator McCain has generally fought against such additions to bills as they came through Congress. He is one of the few Senators who have consistently fought against pork barrel spending and I believe he will continue that commitment as President by vetoing such bills when they arrive on his desk.
4. He is experienced. This is a no brainer. Neither Senator Obama nor Senator McCain has executive experience in the political world. But no one can argue that Barack Obama has the experience level of a John McCain. For example, Senator McCain has made numerous trips to the Middle East even in the past few years. Senator Obama has made one and that one was a political photo shoot. John McCain, for better or for worse, understands how Washington works.
5. He will appoint justices who do not legislate from the bench. Given his track record with the “Gang of 14”, I must admit I’m a little concern about his future judicial appointments. He has publicly declared he will appoint only judges who judge and do not legislate from the bench. Again, McCain’s pledge when compared with Obama’s stand on judicial appointments is 180 degrees different.
6. He does work “both sides of the aisle”. For years John McCain has proven he will work with members from both parties in Congress. I believe at times (e.g., “Gang of 14”), he bends too far to the side of the Democrats. But, like it or not, when McCain says he is bi-partisan he means it. Barack Obama claims he will unite everyone and work both sides of the aisle but, honestly, Senator Obama has done nothing of the sort during his time in politics.
7. He chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. Without question, John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his Vice President won my support to the ticket. Given Obama’s far left philosophy, I was slowing warming to Senator McCain as the only hope of defeating Obama. But when he picked Palin that settled it. To me, this choice illustrated McCain’s political savvy and his good judgment.
Unlike the bad press Governor Palin has received, she is a very intelligent woman who has done a remarkable job both as an Alaskan mayor and as the state’s Governor. She has the highest approval rating of any governor in the country and probably one of the highest of any state or national politician. She is strongly pro-life, fiscally conservative, and a reformer by nature. Governor Palin has more executive experience than either Presidential candidate as well as her Vice President opponent, Senator Joe Biden. She has done far more in her state of Alaska for her people, than Senator Obama has done for the people of Illinois either in the state house or the United States Congress.
Given the choice of a far left wing candidate who supports killing the unborn (and, in some cases, even those already born!), espouses socialism, is weak militarily, and has no experience or a moderate candidate who supports life, is strong militarily, espouses capitalism, has a running mate who is even more traditional and conservative, and can defeat the socialist candidate, I must vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin and I will do so proudly and gladly.
I encourage everyone to exercise their right and vote. But I do encourage those who are seriously considering Barack Obama take a time out, forget the national news media, and check out the Senator’s extremely liberal positions. Are those positions what you really want for our country?
First, let me be upfront on Senator McCain. He was not my choice for the Republican nomination during the primaries. I am not a John McCain fan. There are many reasons why I could vote against him. Here are a few:
1. McCain-Kennedy. This was the infamous “comprehensive” immigration bill which resulted in such a public outcry that it was wiped off the face of the earth. No matter what you call it, the bill was an amnesty bill and a major strike against Senator McCain.
2. McCain-Feingold. Supposedly a campaign reform bill, McCain-Feingold essentially helps incumbents maintain their seats.
3. McCain-Lieberman. The Climate Stewardship Act which would have depressed the economy more than saved the environment.
4. The Gang of 14. Senator McCain was one of the leaders of this informal group of 7 Republican and 7 Democrat Senators who worked together on President Bush’s justice appointments. In my humble opinion, Senator McCain was far TOO bi-partisan with this group, leaning toward the Democratic side way too often.
5. His energy position. Senator McCain has been against off shore drilling and drilling in ANWAR for some time. To his credit, he has changed his position on off shore drilling and now supports it since our nation badly needs this oil. I am hopeful Governor Palin, who supports drilling in ANWAR, will change his mind on that matter as well.
If Hilary Clinton had been the nominee running against John McCain, the above items would probably have driven me to vote for Chuck Baldwin even if that meant giving the Presidency to Clinton (believe me, that aggravates my stomach even to think about it). But Senator Clinton did not win the Democratic nomination, Senator Obama did. If there was another candidate more conservative than John McCain AND who could realistically defeat Barack Obama, I would vote for him. But, there isn’t. So I am left with John McCain.
My remarks should not be interpreted to imply there are no reasons why I would vote for him. He does have several positive stances with which I agree.
1. He is pro-life. As he stated at the Saddleback Forum earlier this year, Senator McCain believes life begins at conception. There have been concerns expressed over some of his views on cloning, but, when contrasted with Senator Obama’s radical view on the life of the unborn, Senator McCain’s position is outstanding.
2. He is pro-military. Senator McCain argued for some time to expand the size of our forces in Iraq and he has been proven correct in that assessment. Foreign leaders know McCain as President is not someone who will back away from a fight. Even more importantly, Senator McCain supports the military and understands the need for strong technology for the defense of our country. Again, his position compared to Senator Obama’s position is like day and night. Obama’s desire is to reduce the military, McCain’s is to strengthen it.
3. He is against pork barrel spending. Although I am disappointed with his vote to approve the most recent bail out package to which the Democrats attached some pork barrel spending, Senator McCain has generally fought against such additions to bills as they came through Congress. He is one of the few Senators who have consistently fought against pork barrel spending and I believe he will continue that commitment as President by vetoing such bills when they arrive on his desk.
4. He is experienced. This is a no brainer. Neither Senator Obama nor Senator McCain has executive experience in the political world. But no one can argue that Barack Obama has the experience level of a John McCain. For example, Senator McCain has made numerous trips to the Middle East even in the past few years. Senator Obama has made one and that one was a political photo shoot. John McCain, for better or for worse, understands how Washington works.
5. He will appoint justices who do not legislate from the bench. Given his track record with the “Gang of 14”, I must admit I’m a little concern about his future judicial appointments. He has publicly declared he will appoint only judges who judge and do not legislate from the bench. Again, McCain’s pledge when compared with Obama’s stand on judicial appointments is 180 degrees different.
6. He does work “both sides of the aisle”. For years John McCain has proven he will work with members from both parties in Congress. I believe at times (e.g., “Gang of 14”), he bends too far to the side of the Democrats. But, like it or not, when McCain says he is bi-partisan he means it. Barack Obama claims he will unite everyone and work both sides of the aisle but, honestly, Senator Obama has done nothing of the sort during his time in politics.
7. He chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. Without question, John McCain’s selection of Sarah Palin as his Vice President won my support to the ticket. Given Obama’s far left philosophy, I was slowing warming to Senator McCain as the only hope of defeating Obama. But when he picked Palin that settled it. To me, this choice illustrated McCain’s political savvy and his good judgment.
Unlike the bad press Governor Palin has received, she is a very intelligent woman who has done a remarkable job both as an Alaskan mayor and as the state’s Governor. She has the highest approval rating of any governor in the country and probably one of the highest of any state or national politician. She is strongly pro-life, fiscally conservative, and a reformer by nature. Governor Palin has more executive experience than either Presidential candidate as well as her Vice President opponent, Senator Joe Biden. She has done far more in her state of Alaska for her people, than Senator Obama has done for the people of Illinois either in the state house or the United States Congress.
Given the choice of a far left wing candidate who supports killing the unborn (and, in some cases, even those already born!), espouses socialism, is weak militarily, and has no experience or a moderate candidate who supports life, is strong militarily, espouses capitalism, has a running mate who is even more traditional and conservative, and can defeat the socialist candidate, I must vote for John McCain and Sarah Palin and I will do so proudly and gladly.
I encourage everyone to exercise their right and vote. But I do encourage those who are seriously considering Barack Obama take a time out, forget the national news media, and check out the Senator’s extremely liberal positions. Are those positions what you really want for our country?
Friday, October 17, 2008
The Patriarch's Pen: Election 2008, Article 2
The Presidential election of 1912 was an interesting one. When, in 1908, Theodore Roosevelt honored his 1904 pledge not to seek another term, he threw his support to his Vice President, William Howard Taft. Taft won the election but, in Roosevelt’s eyes, betrayed the progressive program Roosevelt had instituted. Roosevelt sought the 1912 Republican Party nomination but, when the GOP gave it to Taft, Roosevelt and his supporters left the GOP to form the Progressive Party (also known as the Bull Moose Party).
The Democrats took 46 ballots to select their candidate. The favored Champ Clark of Missouri, current Speaker of the House, could not gain the necessary votes on the first ballot and the battle was on. When influential Democrat William Jennings Bryan threw his support to New Jersey Governor Woodrow Wilson, the tide began to turn and Wilson was ultimately selected.
President Taft was never very enthused about the Presidency. He aspired to a position on the Supreme Court (which he later received) and did not exert much effort in the 1912 campaign. The fireworks were primarily between Wilson and Roosevelt, both known reformers.
The GOP split resulted in a landslide Electoral College win for Wilson. The final tally for the 1912 race was:
Wilson: 435 electoral votes; 6,293,152 popular votes
Roosevelt: 88 electoral votes; 4,119,207 popular votes
Taft: 8 electoral votes; 3,486,333 popular votes
Debs: 0 electoral votes; 900,369 popular votes (Socialist Party)
Chafin: 0 electoral votes; 207,972 popular votes (Prohibition Party)
Theodore Roosevelt was a 3rd party candidate who beat a major party candidate though failing to win the election.
My point of all this: NONE of the 3rd party candidates running in 2008 is Theodore Roosevelt. They CAN NOT win the election.
One of my son-in-laws has noted that they can win if folks vote for them on Election Day. That is absolutely true assuming they are on the ballot in all 50 states. But this is theory. Most Americans can’t even name one of the 3rd party candidates this year. If we are pragmatic about the matter, we will admit, despite the theory, Senator Obama or Senator McCain will be the President-elect on November 5.
Does this mean voting for a 3rd party candidate is “wasting your vote”? I guess it depends on what you mean by wasting. If you are voting your conscience when you select one of these individuals then your vote is right and not wasted.
There are, at least, four candidates running for the Presidency other than the “big two”. I am listing them with some brief personal remarks based on information I have from their campaigns. For more information, check their web sites.
Charles O. “Chuck” Baldwin: Baptist minister. Solidly pro-life. Eliminate or greatly reduce several government agencies (including education, FEMA). Eliminate all family income taxes (he says they are unconstitutional). Eliminate or greatly reduce other taxes. Strong on crime. Get government out of business. Support traditional energy resources as well as research on alternatives. Gun advocate. No federal government health care. Against illegal immigration. Scale back foreign aid. Withdraw from Iraq. Essentially get out of international military matters. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Robert L. “Bob” Barr Jr.: Pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest). Reduce funding of some government agencies but greatly increase defense funding. Greatly reduce personal income tax across the board. Decrease or eliminate other taxes. Strong law enforcement. Strong drug enforcement. Parental choice in education. No government health care. Against illegal immigration. Withdraw from the United Nations. Take action if Iraq does not comply. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Ralph Nader: Says pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest) but also says “supports the principles articulated in Roe v Wade and its progeny). Eliminate funding of national missile defense. Increase alcohol taxes, capital gains taxes, cigarette taxes. Eliminate the death penalty. Decriminize marijuana use. Allow vouchers for education choice. Strengthen regulation and enforcement of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts. Strengthen emission controls. Support the Kyoto treaty to limit global warming. Immigration reform but supports illegal immigrants having all the rights and privileges of United States citizens. Government oversight of business especially in terms of pensions and health care.
Cynthia Ann McKinney: Sorry, but after reading her Green Party’s platform, I have no further comment.
I believe it is safe to say Baldwin and Barr are the more conservative while Nader and McKinney are more liberal. Therefore, my opinion is IF YOU COULD ONLY CHOOSE BETWEEN Obama and McCain, those voting for Baldwin or Barr would vote McCain and those voting for McKinney or Nader would choose Obama. So, if you vote for Baldwin or Barr you are, essentially, taking a vote away from McCain. And, if you vote for McKinney or Nader, you are taking a vote away from Obama.
Like it or not, none of these 3rd party candidates are going to win. Personally, I like the positions of Chuck Baldwin even more than I do those of John McCain (more on McCain later). But if I cast a vote for Baldwin (who can not win) then McCain (who can win) loses a vote.
In 1996 President Clinton ran against Senator Bob Dole. I have never been and never will be a Bill Clinton fan. I also didn’t care much for Bob Dole but held my breath and voted for him in hopes of defeating Clinton. Of course, that hope was not realized. While I do not like President Clinton, I would have easily voted my conscience in 1996 by voting for Chuck Baldwin, if he had run. Yes, Baldwin would not win. Yes, I would be taking a vote from Dole. Yes, I would be helping Clinton win. Oh, well…
So, you might ask, why aren’t you going to vote your conscience in 2008 and choose Chuck Baldwin instead of John McCain? I can answer that question in 3 words: Barack Hussein Obama. Obama is far worse than a Bill Clinton. At least Clinton wasn’t an outright socialist.
While I like the policies of Chuck Baldwin, my conscience says I must vote for a candidate who can keep Obama out of the White House. I must do whatever I can, in good conscience, to beat Obama. The only candidate who can do that is John McCain.
The Democrats took 46 ballots to select their candidate. The favored Champ Clark of Missouri, current Speaker of the House, could not gain the necessary votes on the first ballot and the battle was on. When influential Democrat William Jennings Bryan threw his support to New Jersey Governor Woodrow Wilson, the tide began to turn and Wilson was ultimately selected.
President Taft was never very enthused about the Presidency. He aspired to a position on the Supreme Court (which he later received) and did not exert much effort in the 1912 campaign. The fireworks were primarily between Wilson and Roosevelt, both known reformers.
The GOP split resulted in a landslide Electoral College win for Wilson. The final tally for the 1912 race was:
Wilson: 435 electoral votes; 6,293,152 popular votes
Roosevelt: 88 electoral votes; 4,119,207 popular votes
Taft: 8 electoral votes; 3,486,333 popular votes
Debs: 0 electoral votes; 900,369 popular votes (Socialist Party)
Chafin: 0 electoral votes; 207,972 popular votes (Prohibition Party)
Theodore Roosevelt was a 3rd party candidate who beat a major party candidate though failing to win the election.
My point of all this: NONE of the 3rd party candidates running in 2008 is Theodore Roosevelt. They CAN NOT win the election.
One of my son-in-laws has noted that they can win if folks vote for them on Election Day. That is absolutely true assuming they are on the ballot in all 50 states. But this is theory. Most Americans can’t even name one of the 3rd party candidates this year. If we are pragmatic about the matter, we will admit, despite the theory, Senator Obama or Senator McCain will be the President-elect on November 5.
Does this mean voting for a 3rd party candidate is “wasting your vote”? I guess it depends on what you mean by wasting. If you are voting your conscience when you select one of these individuals then your vote is right and not wasted.
There are, at least, four candidates running for the Presidency other than the “big two”. I am listing them with some brief personal remarks based on information I have from their campaigns. For more information, check their web sites.
Charles O. “Chuck” Baldwin: Baptist minister. Solidly pro-life. Eliminate or greatly reduce several government agencies (including education, FEMA). Eliminate all family income taxes (he says they are unconstitutional). Eliminate or greatly reduce other taxes. Strong on crime. Get government out of business. Support traditional energy resources as well as research on alternatives. Gun advocate. No federal government health care. Against illegal immigration. Scale back foreign aid. Withdraw from Iraq. Essentially get out of international military matters. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Robert L. “Bob” Barr Jr.: Pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest). Reduce funding of some government agencies but greatly increase defense funding. Greatly reduce personal income tax across the board. Decrease or eliminate other taxes. Strong law enforcement. Strong drug enforcement. Parental choice in education. No government health care. Against illegal immigration. Withdraw from the United Nations. Take action if Iraq does not comply. Permit private accounts for Social Security.
Ralph Nader: Says pro-life with minor exceptions (e.g., rape and incest) but also says “supports the principles articulated in Roe v Wade and its progeny). Eliminate funding of national missile defense. Increase alcohol taxes, capital gains taxes, cigarette taxes. Eliminate the death penalty. Decriminize marijuana use. Allow vouchers for education choice. Strengthen regulation and enforcement of the Clean Water and Clean Air Acts. Strengthen emission controls. Support the Kyoto treaty to limit global warming. Immigration reform but supports illegal immigrants having all the rights and privileges of United States citizens. Government oversight of business especially in terms of pensions and health care.
Cynthia Ann McKinney: Sorry, but after reading her Green Party’s platform, I have no further comment.
I believe it is safe to say Baldwin and Barr are the more conservative while Nader and McKinney are more liberal. Therefore, my opinion is IF YOU COULD ONLY CHOOSE BETWEEN Obama and McCain, those voting for Baldwin or Barr would vote McCain and those voting for McKinney or Nader would choose Obama. So, if you vote for Baldwin or Barr you are, essentially, taking a vote away from McCain. And, if you vote for McKinney or Nader, you are taking a vote away from Obama.
Like it or not, none of these 3rd party candidates are going to win. Personally, I like the positions of Chuck Baldwin even more than I do those of John McCain (more on McCain later). But if I cast a vote for Baldwin (who can not win) then McCain (who can win) loses a vote.
In 1996 President Clinton ran against Senator Bob Dole. I have never been and never will be a Bill Clinton fan. I also didn’t care much for Bob Dole but held my breath and voted for him in hopes of defeating Clinton. Of course, that hope was not realized. While I do not like President Clinton, I would have easily voted my conscience in 1996 by voting for Chuck Baldwin, if he had run. Yes, Baldwin would not win. Yes, I would be taking a vote from Dole. Yes, I would be helping Clinton win. Oh, well…
So, you might ask, why aren’t you going to vote your conscience in 2008 and choose Chuck Baldwin instead of John McCain? I can answer that question in 3 words: Barack Hussein Obama. Obama is far worse than a Bill Clinton. At least Clinton wasn’t an outright socialist.
While I like the policies of Chuck Baldwin, my conscience says I must vote for a candidate who can keep Obama out of the White House. I must do whatever I can, in good conscience, to beat Obama. The only candidate who can do that is John McCain.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
President Obama
Based on the latest CBS New York Times poll, those of us who are not supporting Barack Obama might as well stay home on election day. The poll gives Obama a 14 point lead over John McCain in the race for the White House. With three weeks to go, he should be invincible.
Of course, I suspect the poll was conducted among the staff of CBS and the New York Times (with a few outside conservatives thrown in for good measure). Since the other national polls have Obama up only by 5 or so, it is safe to say the CBSNYT poll is dubious at best. So, if you are supporting McCain, forget the polls and make certain you vote.
I still maintain hope that Americans will wake up and realize what they are getting if they elect Obama. Yes, I know, John McCain has his faults (more on this in a future post). But I find it hard to believe that Americans would elect a man like Obama to be the next President. Surely we have more sense than that. Why would you vote for him?
1. In just 4 years (almost 2 of them spent running for President), Obama has earned the title of the most liberal man in the United States Senate. His running mate is number 3 on that list.
2. He has never accomplished anything of importance in his political career either in the Illinois Senate or the United States Senate.
3. He is a committed socialist, a position which has become more apparent in recent days with his remarks about redistributing the wealth.
4. He supports not only abortion but also permitting babies who survive abortions to die (i.e., he opposes protecting infants born alive).
Oh, well, I have listed these elsewhere in this blog so I don't need to go into the entire list again. Suffice it to say, I have hope the American people will wake up and, on election day, NOT elect Obama to the Presidency. I can guarantee you one thing: if Obama is elected, I will be hoarding all the money I have. Forget eating out. Forget sporting events. Forget entertainment venues. Forget traveling. Forget expensive gifts. An Obama Presidency is going to cost each of us a lot of money despite his talking points ("if you make less than $250,000").
Of course, I suspect the poll was conducted among the staff of CBS and the New York Times (with a few outside conservatives thrown in for good measure). Since the other national polls have Obama up only by 5 or so, it is safe to say the CBSNYT poll is dubious at best. So, if you are supporting McCain, forget the polls and make certain you vote.
I still maintain hope that Americans will wake up and realize what they are getting if they elect Obama. Yes, I know, John McCain has his faults (more on this in a future post). But I find it hard to believe that Americans would elect a man like Obama to be the next President. Surely we have more sense than that. Why would you vote for him?
1. In just 4 years (almost 2 of them spent running for President), Obama has earned the title of the most liberal man in the United States Senate. His running mate is number 3 on that list.
2. He has never accomplished anything of importance in his political career either in the Illinois Senate or the United States Senate.
3. He is a committed socialist, a position which has become more apparent in recent days with his remarks about redistributing the wealth.
4. He supports not only abortion but also permitting babies who survive abortions to die (i.e., he opposes protecting infants born alive).
Oh, well, I have listed these elsewhere in this blog so I don't need to go into the entire list again. Suffice it to say, I have hope the American people will wake up and, on election day, NOT elect Obama to the Presidency. I can guarantee you one thing: if Obama is elected, I will be hoarding all the money I have. Forget eating out. Forget sporting events. Forget entertainment venues. Forget traveling. Forget expensive gifts. An Obama Presidency is going to cost each of us a lot of money despite his talking points ("if you make less than $250,000").
Here are just a few web sites which provide some comparisons of the candidates and the party platforms.
- Family Research Council
- Project Vote Smart
- American Family Association
- Platform Comparisons
- Huntley Brown "Why I Can't Vote for Obama" (well written article on Jeremy's blog)
May the Lord have mercy and spare us from an Obama Presidency.
Monday, September 29, 2008
The Patriarch's Pen: Election 2008, Article 1
I know politics and families do not often mix. Politics is, likely, a subject I should avoid in a family blog or newsletter. Yet, this year’s Presidential election greatly concerns me. Therefore, I want to express my opinion (albeit briefly) about the various candidates just to provide the “Patriarch’s” thoughts on the matter.
This entry concerns Senator Obama. The November newsletter, which will be published just before the election, will discuss Senator McCain as well as 3rd party candidates. Those entries will appear on the Wild Walker World blog during the early party of October.
Why I will NOT Vote for Senator Barack Obama
The following are many of the reasons why I will not and can not support Barack Obama for the Presidency. Apart from item #1, the reasons are listed in no specific order.
1. Senator Obama supports the killing of the unborn. Senator Obama not only supports the pro-death cause, he goes far beyond where most abortionists go. Senator Obama supports partial birth abortions. Furthermore, he supports not caring for aborted babies who survive the abortion attempt. He has denied the latter charge but the facts are clear that is his position. He fears caring for such children will result in a “slippery slope” discussion which might end abortions.
Personally, I need no other reasons than that. I will never vote for any candidate of any party for any office at any time when I know they support killing unborn children. How can I trust my life and my family’s lives to the hands of someone who has no problem murdering these infants?
2. Senator Obama will raise taxes. I know Senator Obama promises a tax cut to everyone who makes under $250,000. But I have also heard he will remove the cap on Social Security taxes, eliminate the Bush tax cuts, keep the death tax, and raise sales taxes. Furthermore, he’ll need money for his national health care program as well as other plans he has. He may send you $1000 as he has promised but I suspect that will not turn out to be a cut overall but just a slight reduction in an overall increase.
3. Senator Obama will pull out of the Middle East. Great, given Russia is working with Venezuela and Al Queda still intends to destroy us. Let’s bring the battle to our own front yards.
4. Senator Obama will reduce the military. He has especially noted his attempts to cut the missile defense technology. Well, President Clinton also cut back the military when he was in office. So, when we needed a military to fight in the Middle East, we had to spend tons of money to rebuild it. A reduced military in light of worldwide terrorism is stupid.
5. Senator Obama believes in redistribution of wealth. His “Robin Hood” philosophy of “taking from the rich and giving to the poor” has been clearly documented. This is not only Robin Hood’s slogan; it is also the slogan of socialism and communism. Where is the motivation for those who earn a lot of money and already invest that money into the lives of others via the businesses they run to continue to make money when the Senator and Congress intends to give it to those who will not work? Furthermore, where is the motivation by those who do not work to seek work when the government is giving them the money from the wealthy? I am not wealthy but I also don’t want the government giving me someone else’s money.
6. Senator Obama will raise the capital gains tax. Increasing capital gains will especially hurt small businesses. Such an increase will force companies to: (1) increase the price of their products (see 2 above), (2) reduce employee pay (see 2 above), (3) replace employees with cheaper foreign labor, (4) reduce staff (i.e., layoff), (5) any combination of the above or (6) close up their business. Furthermore, an increase in the capital gains will reduce the incentive to start new businesses (e.g., companies to find alternative sources of energy).
7. Senator Obama supports national health care. He wants health care for everyone, a health care system run by the government. Here is another socialist program we can not afford. Are the rich paying for this in addition to giving their money to others? Or, will there be some type of new tax (go back and reread #2) to help fund this program? Furthermore, name one program the federal government created and ran which was successful? Think about your trips to the local License Bureau or to a Social Security office. Do you really want your health care funded and directed by the federal government?
8. Senator Obama opposes drilling off shore and in Alaska. He supports alternative forms of energy as does any sane person. But, like it or not, we MUST have oil for the near term. However, he will not support drilling off our coasts or in ANWR meaning we must keep buying from foreign nations including some which are becoming less friendly to the United States. He would prefer taxing the “wealthy” oil companies and, somehow, force them to find alternative sources of energy. If additional taxes are placed on oil, the oil companies will pass them on to you by increased prices (see item 2 above). Furthermore, why is it the OIL companies’ responsibility to find ALTERNATIVE energy sources? They are in the OIL business. We need new businesses to deal with that problem. Oh, I forgot, the increase in the capital gains tax will make new business ventures more difficult.
9. Senator Obama has no proven leadership characteristics and has accomplished nothing in the political world. In neither the Illinois Senate nor the United States Senate, Barack Obama has done nothing of importance. Many of his votes in the Illinois Senate were “present” rather than “yes” or “no”. A leader has to be able to take a stand and Senator Obama has not proven he has that ability.
10. Senator Obama has questionable personal ties. His life and political background has been repeatedly tainted by the close associates he has had: hate spewing preachers, a known and proud terrorist, a crook, Wall Street tycoons, etc. Who will he have to advise him while in the White House?
11. Senator Obama will appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court. One or two justices will certainly retire during the next administration, maybe more. Senator Obama will appoint and the Democrat Congress (see # 12 below) will approve justices that are liberal in philosophy. This will result in a Supreme Court which creates law rather than interprets law and will do so long after Senator Obama is out of office.
12. Senator Obama would put the Federal government under the control of one party. His election, barring some miracles in the House and Senate races, will give the Democrats firm control of the legislative and executive branches of government. Given the far left philosophy of Senator Obama (called the most liberal man in Congress; by the way, Vice President candidate Joe Biden is listed as the 3rd most liberal man in Congress) as well as the far left bent of many in Congress, such a scenario will result in a far left turn for our nation, a turn from which we may never recover.
In my opinion, Senator Barack Obama is a very dangerous individual for those who love our country and the freedoms we have.
This entry concerns Senator Obama. The November newsletter, which will be published just before the election, will discuss Senator McCain as well as 3rd party candidates. Those entries will appear on the Wild Walker World blog during the early party of October.
Why I will NOT Vote for Senator Barack Obama
The following are many of the reasons why I will not and can not support Barack Obama for the Presidency. Apart from item #1, the reasons are listed in no specific order.
1. Senator Obama supports the killing of the unborn. Senator Obama not only supports the pro-death cause, he goes far beyond where most abortionists go. Senator Obama supports partial birth abortions. Furthermore, he supports not caring for aborted babies who survive the abortion attempt. He has denied the latter charge but the facts are clear that is his position. He fears caring for such children will result in a “slippery slope” discussion which might end abortions.
Personally, I need no other reasons than that. I will never vote for any candidate of any party for any office at any time when I know they support killing unborn children. How can I trust my life and my family’s lives to the hands of someone who has no problem murdering these infants?
2. Senator Obama will raise taxes. I know Senator Obama promises a tax cut to everyone who makes under $250,000. But I have also heard he will remove the cap on Social Security taxes, eliminate the Bush tax cuts, keep the death tax, and raise sales taxes. Furthermore, he’ll need money for his national health care program as well as other plans he has. He may send you $1000 as he has promised but I suspect that will not turn out to be a cut overall but just a slight reduction in an overall increase.
3. Senator Obama will pull out of the Middle East. Great, given Russia is working with Venezuela and Al Queda still intends to destroy us. Let’s bring the battle to our own front yards.
4. Senator Obama will reduce the military. He has especially noted his attempts to cut the missile defense technology. Well, President Clinton also cut back the military when he was in office. So, when we needed a military to fight in the Middle East, we had to spend tons of money to rebuild it. A reduced military in light of worldwide terrorism is stupid.
5. Senator Obama believes in redistribution of wealth. His “Robin Hood” philosophy of “taking from the rich and giving to the poor” has been clearly documented. This is not only Robin Hood’s slogan; it is also the slogan of socialism and communism. Where is the motivation for those who earn a lot of money and already invest that money into the lives of others via the businesses they run to continue to make money when the Senator and Congress intends to give it to those who will not work? Furthermore, where is the motivation by those who do not work to seek work when the government is giving them the money from the wealthy? I am not wealthy but I also don’t want the government giving me someone else’s money.
6. Senator Obama will raise the capital gains tax. Increasing capital gains will especially hurt small businesses. Such an increase will force companies to: (1) increase the price of their products (see 2 above), (2) reduce employee pay (see 2 above), (3) replace employees with cheaper foreign labor, (4) reduce staff (i.e., layoff), (5) any combination of the above or (6) close up their business. Furthermore, an increase in the capital gains will reduce the incentive to start new businesses (e.g., companies to find alternative sources of energy).
7. Senator Obama supports national health care. He wants health care for everyone, a health care system run by the government. Here is another socialist program we can not afford. Are the rich paying for this in addition to giving their money to others? Or, will there be some type of new tax (go back and reread #2) to help fund this program? Furthermore, name one program the federal government created and ran which was successful? Think about your trips to the local License Bureau or to a Social Security office. Do you really want your health care funded and directed by the federal government?
8. Senator Obama opposes drilling off shore and in Alaska. He supports alternative forms of energy as does any sane person. But, like it or not, we MUST have oil for the near term. However, he will not support drilling off our coasts or in ANWR meaning we must keep buying from foreign nations including some which are becoming less friendly to the United States. He would prefer taxing the “wealthy” oil companies and, somehow, force them to find alternative sources of energy. If additional taxes are placed on oil, the oil companies will pass them on to you by increased prices (see item 2 above). Furthermore, why is it the OIL companies’ responsibility to find ALTERNATIVE energy sources? They are in the OIL business. We need new businesses to deal with that problem. Oh, I forgot, the increase in the capital gains tax will make new business ventures more difficult.
9. Senator Obama has no proven leadership characteristics and has accomplished nothing in the political world. In neither the Illinois Senate nor the United States Senate, Barack Obama has done nothing of importance. Many of his votes in the Illinois Senate were “present” rather than “yes” or “no”. A leader has to be able to take a stand and Senator Obama has not proven he has that ability.
10. Senator Obama has questionable personal ties. His life and political background has been repeatedly tainted by the close associates he has had: hate spewing preachers, a known and proud terrorist, a crook, Wall Street tycoons, etc. Who will he have to advise him while in the White House?
11. Senator Obama will appoint liberal justices to the Supreme Court. One or two justices will certainly retire during the next administration, maybe more. Senator Obama will appoint and the Democrat Congress (see # 12 below) will approve justices that are liberal in philosophy. This will result in a Supreme Court which creates law rather than interprets law and will do so long after Senator Obama is out of office.
12. Senator Obama would put the Federal government under the control of one party. His election, barring some miracles in the House and Senate races, will give the Democrats firm control of the legislative and executive branches of government. Given the far left philosophy of Senator Obama (called the most liberal man in Congress; by the way, Vice President candidate Joe Biden is listed as the 3rd most liberal man in Congress) as well as the far left bent of many in Congress, such a scenario will result in a far left turn for our nation, a turn from which we may never recover.
In my opinion, Senator Barack Obama is a very dangerous individual for those who love our country and the freedoms we have.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Patriotism per Obama/Biden
Do you want to be a patriotic American? Then PAY MORE TAXES! That’s what Democratic Vice President nominee Senator Joe Biden told us yesterday.
It's time to be patriotic ... time to jump in, time to be part of the deal, time to help get America out of the rut.
I’m sorry, sir. I have no interest in giving more of the money I work hard for to the government which has no idea how to use it. Helping others who have need is great and I do so via the various charities to which I contribute (Senator Biden, by the way, averages less than $400 a year to charitable contributions despite the fact he makes a lot more money than almost any one reading this blog). You, Senator, and your running mate, Senator Barack Obama, want us to give you more of the money which we have EARNED so you can give it to anyone, including those who won’t get off the couch and do anything! And you have the gall to say that’s patriotic?
If you are reading this blog and are planning on voting for Barack Obama and Joe Biden then I ask you take some time and ask yourself why. Ok, you don’t like President Bush. Well, he’s not running. You don’t like the Republicans. Ok, but the Democrats presently control both houses of Congress and are the ones doing nothing to solve any of the problems facing our country. You don’t like John McCain. Ok, but is THAT the reason you are going to vote for Obama? There are other candidates running. I ask you to seriously consider and rethink why you really want Obama. Do you have any idea what he intends to do if elected?
I stumbled across an interesting Internet site last night entitled BarackObamaTest.com. You answer several questions on a variety of subjects and your answers are compared to Senator Obama’s positions. The site doesn’t tell you for whom to vote. It simply returns a value indicating how close Barack Obama is to your position. I took the test and Senator Obama and I agreed on 4% of the issues.
Whether I like President Bush or the Republicans, I will not cast my vote for a candidate which agrees with me on the issues only 4% of the time!
That, Senator Biden, is patriotic!
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
"People Who Get Things Done"
Before class last evening, I was chatting with another professor in the hallway at the school. He commented that he found it interesting that each party was getting a boost from people who are great at giving speeches (Obama, Palin). He said our country needed "people who get things done" rather than those who can give good speeches.
Actually, I think we need leaders who do both. They need to be able to get things done yet also able to communicate what their plans are for this country to the people. I commented to the professor that, in this race, the nominees, for the most part, are people who have gotten things done.
Think about it. Whether you agree or disagree with their policies or actions:
- Senator Joe Biden is a person who has gotten things done.
- Senator John McCain is a person who has gotten things done.
- Governor Sarah Palin is a person who has gotten things done.
- Senator Barack Obama ... hasn't accomplished one thing worthy of note either in the Illinois state house or in Washington.
Thursday, September 11, 2008
Senator Obama is like Jesus
If you want change, you want the Democratic Party. Barack Obama was a community organizer like Jesus, who our minister prayed about. Pontius Pilate was a governor.
Oh my, I guess some states will send anyone to Congress to represent them. Wait, I forgot! We did send Claire McCaskill to the Senate didn't we!
Congressman Cohen reveals several tidbits in this quote. Here are some I see:
1. He knows the Democratic talking points ("change").
2. Senator Obama's claim to fame is his community organizing work rather than his work in either the Illinois congress or the United States Senate (where he did virtually nothing in either one).
3. Senator Obama is indeed the Messiah, well, at least like the Messiah. Of course, Jesus' "community organizing" involved bringing a sword and setting a man against his father and a daughter against his mother (Matthew 10:34-36). Is that the type of community organizing Senator Obama did? Hmmm, maybe the congressman is right!?
4. Our United States Congress evidently knows nothing about Jesus since the Congressman had to explain to his colleagues that this Jesus was the one "who our minister prayed about".
5. Since Jesus is a forbidden topic in our public school system and since Congressman Cohen had to explain to the House who Jesus was, I guess I can conclude that all members of Congress were educated in our public school systems. Is my logic correct here?!
6. Pontius Pilate was governor of Palestine during the latter years of Christ's life. So Congressman Cohen is claiming Governor Sarah Palin is like Governor Pontius Pilate. That's interesting since no one in Palestine voted for Pilate whereas Governor Palin was elected by the residents of her state. Few in Palestine liked Pontius Pilate whereas most of the residents of Alaska love Governor Palin. Pontius Pilate was male whereas Governor Palin is female. Pontius Pilate was installed by the Roman Emperor, Tiberius. Governor Palin was installed by the people of her state. Somehow I am failing to see the comparison here. Oh, I guess its in the title, "Governor". Of course, Pilate also had the title "procurator". Oh well...
7. Will someone tell the Democrats that Senator Obama is running for the office of President whereas Governor Palin is running for the office of Vice President?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
