Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Barack Obama is now putting the United States squarely a decade behind Britain. Listening to the President’s State of the Union message last week was like a surreal visit to our own recent past: there were, almost word for word, all those interminable Gordon Brown Budgets that preached “fairness” while listing endless new ways in which central government would intervene in every form of economic activity.
Last paragraph.
The United States is a country that was invented to allow people to be free of domination or persecution by the state. Its constitution and political institutions are specifically designed to prevent the federal government from oppressing the rights, or undermining the sense of responsibility, of the individual citizen. If it ceases to stand by that principle, then it will suffer a catastrophic loss of purpose and identity – as well as making a quite remarkably stupid and unnecessary mistake.
It's not about Obama right now. It's about us and what choice we make for the future. It's always been about us.
Is it going to be "we the people" or "we the governed"? What kind of country do we want - because make no mistake about it - the president is promoting fairness - not freedom - and fairness must be defined by somebody and regulated accordingly - which means freedom will be reduced.
Americans support social security and medicare by over 70%, including Republicans.
Americans don't think people who work should be allowed to go hungry, or without a roof over their head, or without heat in the winter.
Americans don't think people should be turned away from a Hospital, even if you can't pay for it.
We are all socialists now.
We can pay for social security and medicare, or we can pay for a military that costs 4 times what the rest of the world combined spends, accounting for over 50% of world wide military spending alone, when the next highest contributor is china, coming in at 7% of all world wide military spending. Ignoring the fact that 50% of the world are our allies or military partners, yet we increase military spending more.
Almost all military spending increases from 2001 until now, are solely by the United States. We accounted for all increases in military spending for the last three years.
If Republicans gave two ****s about what the majority of Americans wanted, they'd secure social security with a constitutional amendment, removing the taxes from the general fund. They would stabilize medicare. They would cut the military spending, and raise taxes on the wealthy.
It's not about Obama right now. It's about us and what choice we make for the future. It's always been about us.
Is it going to be "we the people" or "we the governed"? What kind of country do we want - because make no mistake about it - the president is promoting fairness - not freedom - and fairness must be defined by somebody and regulated accordingly - which means freedom will be reduced.
The Republicans had full control of the House, Senate and Presidency for most of Bush's reign. They could have raised taxes on most people and reduced them on the rich as you're suggesting. They didn't.
In terms of freedom, taxing everyone at an equal rate is still regulation, so there's no more freedom there than there would be with a more flat tax.
Of course, taxing poor people more and rich people less as you're suggesting would mean more people going hungry, more homeless families, fewer people in college, more crime and more social problems. I'm not sure that your buddy JC would think that it would be a swell idea.
(YAWN) This piece is soooooo original. Never heard any of that stuff before.
Yet you embrace the philosophy of Obama, but are simply uncomfortable with the label "socialism". It is certainly peculiar that liberals, when faced with the realities of thier core beliefs, shy away from the fact that thier principles are more in line with totalitarianism than liberty.
(YAWN) This piece is soooooo original. Never heard any of that stuff before.
You find this "stuff" boring? Be prepared to be bored because the upcoming campaign will be all about the choice we are facing--whether to embrace a statist, redistributionist society or one that remains true to its foundation in liberty. It is Obama who laid out that choice in his Osawatomie speech and reprised it in his State of the Union address.
Of course he did not put it in those terms. He spoke as an advocate of "fairness" as defined by himself and a central government. In essence he sees fairness in the same way Karl Marx did: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. On both sides of that equation it is the central government that gets to decide 'ability' and 'need.' As Obama once said early in his administration (and I'm quoting him loosely) "At some point a person has accumulated enough wealth." And, of course, it is Obama who gets to decide when that point has been reached.
And in Obama's view the people who advocate for the freedom to work and to keep the fruit of their labors, well, they're the bad guys. They're the guys who want to create a society where it's every man for himself. They're the guys who have no social conscience, who have no understanding of the interconnectedness of all citizens and how a moral society ensures an equality of outcomes because, after all, the successful did not make it on their own. Ultimately society is responsible for their success and so society has a rightful claim on as much of the fruits of that success as it deems reasonable and necessary. In Obama's telling, the very liberty that unleashed the creative and productive energy of this great nation is now the enemy of social justice and must be curbed for the betterment of all.
This is the choice we face in November. The 'Hope and Change' mask is gone and we can see clearly now where Obama's desire to "fundamentally transform" America is taking us. If we go any further down this path it is likely there will be no turning back.
Yet you embrace the philosophy of Obama, but are simply uncomfortable with the label "socialism". It is certainly peculiar that liberals, when faced with the realities of thier core beliefs, shy away from the fact that thier principles are more in line with totalitarianism than liberty.
The very hallmark of all great socialists; hitler, stalin, mao, pol pot, kim jung ill......did I miss anybody?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
