Tag Archives: Obama

This post is in response to a comment posted in the “Suggestions” section. Thanks jenevieves for the request!

Despite nature’s best efforts to hinder the Republican National Convention and the subsequent nomination of their less-than ideal candidate, the time for Mitt Romney’s inevitable nomination as the GOP’s candidate for president is inevitably drawing closer. This leaves many conservatives, including myself, at a loss as to who we should vote for. We can all agree, (or at least, all of us conservatives) that we don’t want to see Obama in office for another four years. But is it worth selling our souls, compromising our principles, ignoring our consciences, and voting for a middle-of-the-road moderate in order to get rid of our current commander-in-chief? More and more these days, I hear grumblings amongst the hard-core conservatives about the leftward leaning Republican Party and their rather undesirable nominee. More and more often, I hear people say that they would sit this election out or vote for an obscure third-party candidate rather than throw their support behind a middle of the road moderate. But is this the right thing to do? Is it worth throwing away a vote just to avoid the guilty feeling that may come from pulling the lever for Mitt?

In terms of numbers, the answer is obvious. A vote not cast by a conservative is a vote for Obama. A vote cast for a third-party president is a vote for Obama. By not voting for Mitt Romney, conservatives are effectively voting for Obama. So in terms of numbers and statistics, it’s straight forward. If we want to get rid of Obama (which is one thing that ALL conservatives seem to agree on), then we’d better grit our teeth, bite the bullet, and cast our votes for Romney, even if it does give us a sick feeling inside to vote for someone who once pedaled his own version of Obamacare.

Despite the straight-forward logic behind the numbers, there are some very convincing arguments to be made against voting for Romney. For example, supposing we conservatives get out there and vote Romney into office. Okay, great. What have we actually accomplished? Granted, Romney in office means that we’ve gotten rid of Obama, which is no small accomplishment. But what else will we have accomplished? If conservatives come out in force to vote for Romney, they will be sending the GOP a definite message. In essence, they will be admitting defeat. If conservatives vote for Romney, in essence they will be saying to the Republican Party: “You can shove us around, force your moderate candidates down our throat, and as long as they’re only marginally better than the democrat against whom they run, we’ll get out there and vote for him.”

Now, that’s the last message I want the Republicans to get from me, and I think most conservatives would be in agreement with me on that. So when viewed from that perspective, it might be worth sitting this election out just for the purpose of waking up the GOP. After all, if Mitt Romney loses by a land-slide because conservatives decided to stay home, it won’t take Republican leadership long to figure out that they need to come up with candidates who hold real conservative values rather than trying to cajole us into supporting their moderate choices. But there are a couple of problems with this way of thinking.

First of all, we have to ask ourselves whether or not the GOP will get the message. Even if enough conservatives sit the election out to make Romney lose, will this actually get the Republican Party’s attention? One would hope so. I mean, of all times for a Republican candidate to win, one would think that this election would be the easiest. Obama’s done such a bad job for the last four years that Mickey Mouse could run against him and win. Or at least that’s what one would think. So if Mitt Romney were to actually lose this election because enough disgruntled conservatives didn’t vote, one would think that this would be enough of a wake-up call to get the party leadership’s attention. But then again, it might not. Is it worth throwing away a vote and possibly handing Obama another four years in office in order to send the GOP a message that they might possibly never get?

Furthermore, it’s worth considering the price that we might have to pay if Obama gets another term in office. Our nation is heading towards destruction. Our economy is ready to take another nose-dive, we’re practically owned by the Chinese, our military is being downsized, and our liberties are being whittled down to nothing.  Given another four years, there’s no telling what kind of havoc Obama might wreak. Remember, these last four years that Obama’s been in office, he’s been thinking about getting reelected this year. So the Obama we’ve seen so far is most likely the more conservative version of the man. Once he doesn’t have to worry about reelection, then he’s free to pull out all the stops, and let loose with a storm of liberal executive orders. True, Obama will most likely have a conservative congress to stand in his way, but as we’ve seen already, Obama doesn’t let the Constitution stand in his way. He’s more than happy to grab whatever power he can and use it however he likes. The prospect of a two-term Obama presidency is truly terrifying.

One might rightly wonder whether or not Mitt Romney is really a much better alternative than Obama. Obama is driving our country towards disaster at record speed, no doubt, but will Romney be able to put on the brakes in time? While I’m not confident that he will, I think that it’s reasonable to say that Romney will be able to at least somewhat reverse the changes Obama has made. With a conservative congress and a Republican president, our chances of getting Obamacare repealed are fairly good. Also, I think the Republicans actually mean business about cutting spending and reducing taxes. Finally, I have no doubt that Romney’s foreign policy will be better than Obama’s, and that Romney will work to restore the military which Obama has worked so hard to downsize. Now, I’m not overly confident that Romney and the Republicans will bring about the deep, across the board reform that the country so desperately needs, but I do feel that despite their numerous, glaring flaws, the Republicans in office will be at least somewhat better for our country than the Democrats. If our country weren’t so close to disaster already, or if Obama were a slightly less radical liberal and weren’t quite so hell-bent on destroying our country, then I would seriously consider sitting this election out to send the GOP a message. But we as a nation are teetering on the brink of disaster as it is. We can’t afford to play political games with this election just to make a point to the party leadership or satisfy our consciences.

No doubt, the GOP knew at the start of this election cycle that they had the Republican base over a barrel. More than likely, the moderates in the party took advantage of the situation, knowing that they could force a moderate down our throats now, when the stakes on this election are so high. The Republicans hold the trump card, and they know it. Despite our moral qualms, most conservatives are going to grudgingly cast their vote for the Republican candidate, no matter how moderate he might be, and the Republican Party leadership knew that. But just because the GOP took advantage of the situation doesn’t make their position any less strong. Despite whatever devious tactics might have been used to get Romney nominated, we still have to grit our teeth and vote for him if we want to keep the country from going over the proverbial cliff.

But what does this mean for the future of the party? Does this election doom us to having to live with moderate candidates from now on? Well, I sincerely hope not. And I think that there are ways that the conservative base can fight back, even if we do vote for Romney.

First of all, we need to keep our politicians accountable. This means writing letters, making phone calls, going to rallies, etc. It’s a lot harder than just sitting out an election, but it will likely be far more effective. As long as Romney knows that he has a conservative base on his back, watching his every move, I think he will ere on the side of conservatism as long as he’s in the White House. But we need to make sure that Romney and the Republican congress (assuming the Republicans do in fact win) know that we’re watching their every move, and we must keep them accountable.

Secondly, if Romney gets elected and then blows this term, then I say by all means, we should boot him out in 2016. If in four years we’re still facing high taxes, irresponsible spending, and more attacks on our liberties, then we should first of all try to get someone besides Romney nominated to run for the GOP, or else not vote for Romney to get a second term. (Romney has said that he plans to be a one-term president anyway, so this may be a non-issue, if Romney keeps his word.) We need to send a strong message to the GOP: Yes, you forced us to vote for a moderate candidate, this time. But don’t get any big ideas; we won’t let this happen again.

In conclusion, I say that despite the moral qualms many of us may have, I think that the right thing to do in this election is to vote for Romney, even if he is just the lesser of two evils. As much as I wish there were a viable conservative candidate to vote for, our country is in too dire of a position for us to play around with this election. But at the same time, we should not give up and give in to the moderate trend which seems to be dominating the party. Winning the election will be the easy part, and we will by no means be done after November 6th. In fact, Election Day will be just the beginning of the battle we must battle to set our nation back on track, and we must be prepared to join the fight.


If you’re like me, you probably get a bunch of emails from every corner of the political world every day. With most of them, I promptly hit the delete button and move on, but there is one variety which always catches my eye. For some reason, I always enjoy reading the emails which predict the eminent collapse of the United States, either from foreign invasion or else from inward destruction, or possibly a combination of both. I normally only sort of half-way pay attention, for the most part writing the warnings of disaster off as paranoia with a hint of fear-mongering. But I saw an article today that causes me to change the way I look at such emails. You can read it for yourself here:

In case you didn’t read the article, here’s the short version. A Russian attack submarine has been cruising around in the Gulf of Mexico for WEEKS, and we didn’t even KNOW about it until after they left. At the same time, Russian strategic bombers were flying in restricted U.S. airspace near Alaska and California. I assume we DID know about those at the time, but our military did absolutely nothing about it.

I don’t know if the Russians are out to get us, or whether they’re just flexing their military muscles. Regardless of the Russian intentions, this clearly demonstrates that as a country, we are vulnerable and ripe for destruction. I mean, my goodness, if the Russians can fly bombers over our RESTRICTED AIRSPACE without us so much as batting an eyelash, what WILL it take for them to get a reaction out of us? Will they have to fire cruise missiles at the White House before they get our beloved leader’s attention? It seems hard to believe, but I think Obama truly is intent on bringing America down. Maybe he doesn’t want to destroy the U.S. entirely, but I think he definitely wants to destroy our prosperity and give us a big slice of humble pie. If you have any doubts, just look at his record so far. He’s spending us into bankruptcy, while at the same time cutting our military. He’s reduced our nuclear arsenal to almost nothing, and cutting the military budget by $487 billion. And when Russia flies bombers into our strategic air space, he does NOTHING.

I truly think that Obama has a chip on his shoulder, and an enduring grudge against the U.S., particularly the middle and upper class. Any one of his blunders might be excusable as just that: a stupid blunder. If it were JUST the economy, or JUST our national defense, or JUST the excessive taxation of the upper and middle classes, or JUST the assault on our personal liberty and freedom through healthcare takeover, I MIGHT be able to write it off as the mistake of a well-meaning liberal. But all of these combined leads me to one conclusion: Obama wants to teach the U.S. a lesson. He’s tired of us being number one in the world, and he’s ready for us to be brought down a notch. To me, this is truly frightening.

I’ve felt for a long time that our country is headed for some kind of disaster, and this just makes me more sure. I just wonder if it’s too late to save ourselves. Maybe we should all move to Texas and secede before things get really ugly.

Normally, I like to post only the stuff that I write. However, on some occasions, there are so many well-written opinions already out there that I feel like whatever I write will only be regurgitating what has already been said. Obama’s bungle about “you didn’t build that business” is just such an issue. I could go on for a great many paragraphs about how wrong that statement is. It is an assault on us as individuals, and it undermines the very basis of the American way of life and capitalism itself. But, as I said, so much has been written already that I feel that anything I would say would consist of me parroting back to you what others have already written. So instead of continuing to rant, I’d like to invite you to read an excellent piece on the subject:

Yesterday, Mitt Romney visited Solyndra, a symbol of the failed Obama economics policies. You can watch the speech he gave here:

I must say, I think Romney hit the nail on the head. Solyndra is a perfect example of Obama’s complete lack of understanding of business and economics. As Romney said, Obama’s idea of “free enterprise” is taking money from the taxpayers, and giving it to his friends. Although, I would go further than that. I think that Obama knows exactly what free enterprise is. Obama is actively running against free enterprise. See one example here:

This video is only one of many examples of Obama’s anti-capitalism, anti-freedom philosophy. Obama doesn’t have a poor understanding of free enterprise. He knows exactly what free enterprise is, and he’s out to kill it.

Romney goes on to criticize the Solyndra plant as being too extravagant, citing the thermostat adjustable showers with music for the employees to listen to as they bathe? To that I would say, bravo Mitt. Why is it that corporations get chewed out for having private jets, while Solyndra can get away with building an extravagant palace using tax-payer money? Why is it that corporate executives get criticized for living lavish lifestyles, while government officials can get away with millions in bonuses? Corporations actually produce things and make people’s lives better. What has Solyndra, or any government investment like it, actually produced? Absolutely nothing, other than a debt which will be next to impossible to repay.

Romney also made a good point on why government intervention in the private sector is a bad idea, even if the company the government invests in is successful. As Romney said, the government is sending the message to everyone else that the best way to succeed in business is not to have a good product, not to have a creative idea, but to have good lobbyists. The simple fact is that it’s not the government’s job to pick winners and losers in business. The government’s job is to remove barriers to private enterprise, not to decide which companies deserve to succeed and which companies don’t. The free market works if left to itself, but as soon as government sticks its nose into private sector’s business, the result is multi-million dollar blunders like Solyndra.

There is an active war on capitalism and freedom in general underway in the country, and Barack Obama is leading the charge.

As promised, I’m going to start writing again! So if you happen to be craving a fresh, conservative, and of course always RIGHT perspective on current (or at least semi-current) events, look no further! Or, if you’re not craving such a right-leaning perspective, then… stick around anyway! If nothing else, you might get into an interesting debate with some other reader, or myself!

As I said in my last post, today we are going to revisit what has proved to be by far the most popular topic on this blog: the stupid things that Obama has done. It seems that lots of people dislike our commander and chief, but many don’t seem to know exactly why they dislike him. In search of the truth, many readers are directed to this website, where they read and are enlightened about the many mistakes of our glorious leader. I first posted a list of five stupid things that Obama had done sometime after the inauguration, and I feel that after nearly three and a half years of Obama in the White House, it’s time to update that list to include some of his more recent blunders. So, here are what rank as (in my opinion) some of the worst things that Obama has done so far.

1. Abysmal handling of the economy
Okay, so this is sort of leeching off my list from three years ago, where I criticized Obama’s stimulus package. But seriously… let’s see how Obama’s stimulus has held up under the test of time. Our unemployment jumped from below five percent before Obama, to around ten percent in 2010. Now, currently the unemployment numbers are falling, but if you pay attention closely, the reason those numbers are falling is not because more jobs have been created, but because people have given up looking for jobs! (If you’ve given up looking for a job, you’re not considered unemployed… go figure.) And what has Obama’s response to all this been? Spend, spend, spend! Sure, Obama claims that he wants fiscal responsibility for government, but when the rubber meets the road, there is no government program too expensive for Obama to fund. And where has all this massive spending gotten us? Well, more unemployment, national debt beyond imagination, and the loss of our AAA credit rating. I told you this back in 2009 that Obama’s policies were a bad idea. And I ask you, are things better or worse now that Obama’s policies have taken effect? I could write a whole post about how bad the Obama economy is, (and I might), but for now I will move on to the next item.

2. Shoving Obamacare down the American people’s throats
This perhaps should be number one on the list, because I think it truly was one of the worst decisions he and the democrats have made in the last three years. Let’s look at the facts, shall we? Obamacare over the next ten years is going to cost us $1,160 billion dollars. It will introduce even more government control into what is literally one of the most personal and private aspects of our lives. It will give bureaucrats the power to tell us how we should eat, how much we should exercise, and what medications and procedures we should have. This is so bad in so many ways, it’s depressing just thinking about it. But what makes it really, really stupid strategically speaking is that at the time it was passed, an overwhelming majority of Americans were against Obamacare. In fact, a majority of Americans still are against it. So why on earth did the democrats decide to shove this monstrosity through congress against the will of the people? I honestly don’t know. Maybe they knew they were going down, and they wanted to use their power while they still had it. But whatever the reason, Obamacare was just plain stupid, and we will be suffering as a result of their stupidity for years to come (unless the supreme court comes to its senses and makes the right decision).

3. Nixing of the Keystone Pipeline
Now, I’m the first to agree that eventually, we will need to find an alternative energy source because, let’s face it, we will eventually run out of oil. I’m all for developing electric cars which are powered by nuclear-generated electricity. But, that said, the way to promote the development is not by restricting access to oil. And Obama’s policy on energy has been absolutely awful over the last three years. First, there was the knee-jerk moratorium on deep water off-shore drilling. Then, to satisfy the left-wing environmentalists, Obama halted the construction of the Keystone pipeline, which would have helped tremendously in bringing down the price of gasoline, and created jobs. Obama is obviously pandering to the left-wing environmentalists in an effort to get reelected (notice, Obama didn’t say he would permanently end the project, just that he was going to conveniently delay making a decision until after his reelection), so in a sense, this might be a smart political move. After all, allowing the pipeline probably isn’t going to win him any conservative votes (he’s far too far gone for that), but it might anger some of the hard-core environmentalists that he seeks to please. But while this move might have been politically expedient, it was horrible for the country.

People think that the price of gas is somehow controlled by the oil companies. This is sheer lunacy. The oil companies are going to charge as little as they can get away with while still being profitable. The price of oil is determined primarily by available supply, and secondarily by taxes. It is interesting to note that in the last fifty years, we have cut our domestic oil production nearly in half, while simultaneously the prices of oil have skyrocketed. This is because instead of using North American oil (which we have in abundance), we buy oil from the Middle East, who has absolutely no interest in the health of our economy, and in some cases has the express interest of bringing our country to disaster. The obvious solution to the problem would be to increase North American production (that way we can either produce our own oil, or buy it from the Canadians who have a vested interest in our economy). If the US started buying oil from Canada or producing it domestically, global prices would fall, and the amount that Americans pay at the pump would be drastically reduced. The Keystone Pipeline was a measure designed to get Canadian oil to US markets, which would have brought a dramatic drop in prices. But instead of allowing a REAL economic stimulus through (the Keystone Pipeline would have put more money back in everyone’s pockets, as well as creating real, useful jobs), Obama decided to stop the construction just for the purpose of pleasing his far-left-leaning environmentalist buddies. Again, I could write an entire post on oil and Obama’s energy policies (and maybe I will), but for now, I’ll move on to the next item.

4. Taking credit for bin Laden’s death
This one is interesting. Now, it’s harder to pin Obama down on this, because it’s not like he’s going around taking personal credit for killing Osama. But what he is doing is refusing to acknowledge that the policies of torturing prisoners at Guantanamo bay was what led to the US finding bin Laden’s location to begin with. Remember, Obama made a promise to close the detention camps in his 2008 presidential campaign, calling the camps a “sad chapter in American history.” Then, when the very camps that he condemned turn around and produce information vital to the killing of bin Laden, Obama makes absolutely no acknowledgement that maybe these interrogation camps weren’t quite so terrible after all.

Now, it would be too much to expect Obama to admit that he’s wrong, I think. After all, if he came out in favor of the camps, he would instantly alienate much of his leftward leaning anti-war voters. So in a way, you can’t blame the guy for doing what he’s doing. But what’s really disgusting is that he turns around and takes credit for bin Laden’s death. The fact is that if Obama had had a chance to enact his policies on Guantanamo ten years ago, bin Laden would still be running around free today. But Obama blatantly deceives the weak-minded masses into believing that it was somehow his policies which led to bin Laden’s death. This is not so much stupid as it is just nauseating. Bush deserves ten times more credit than Obama does for bin Laden’s death, but of course no one in the media would ever dream of telling you that. I can only hope that Mitt Romney is smart enough to point out this fact, in which case it will make Obama look very stupid. But if Romney fails to take advantage of this glaring contradiction, then Obama will come out looking great, and get all the credit for bin Laden’s death.

5. Flip-flopping on gay marriage
This is more recent, so I’m not sure if it really belongs on a “top five” list. But, I think it does merit some attention. And this one is really just stupid, I think. Obama is claiming that his views on gay marriage are “evolving” so that he’s now come out in favor of legal recognition of gay marriage. Now, while I think that his intention was to win more gay votes, I don’t see what this is really actually buying him. First of all, there’s no way on earth that the gays are voting for Romney. Obama and the democrats have the gay rights vote in the bag. So coming out for gay rights isn’t going to win Obama any more votes. But what it does do is give Mitt Romney an ideal opportunity to tear into Obama for flip-flopping on his position. Why Obama chose to change his official view right now is a mystery to me, as I don’t see what it buys him, but I know it could potentially hurt him. There are only two reasons I can see for Obama’s endorsement of gay marriage.

The first possible reason is that he wants to energize the gay rights base. The gay rights vote might already be in the bag for Obama, but if they’re not passionate enough on Election Day, they might not get out to vote. So perhaps this is an effort get the gay rights voters to actually come out to the ballot box and cast their vote. The other possibility is that Obama is actually worried about some of the gay rights votes being lost to a libertarian candidate. This is not too far-fetched, as a libertarian candidate might actually draw a large number of gay rights voters; large enough perhaps to change the landscape of the election. But either way, I think that changing his views on gay marriage at the last political second is a mistake. If the republicans have any common sense, they’ll attack Obama on this and hopefully reveal him to be the political posturer he truly is.

Well, there you have it, my friends: an updated, revised list of the stupid things that Obama has done over the last three and a half years. I can only hope that Americans have enough common sense to see through Obama’s pathetic attempts at attacking the Republicans to the truth of Obama’s miserable failures.

It’s been two years since Obama was elected president of the United States. In less than two year since Obama’s inauguration, Obama’s approval rating has fallen from +21 with 44% of Americans strongly approving of Obama and only 23% strongly disapproving to a rating of -16, with 43% strongly disapproving, and just 27% strongly approving. And just two days ago, we saw the largest Republican turnover in congress since the end of World War II. Many people on the radio, TV, etc. are asking the same question: what happened? Where did Obama go wrong? How did such a wildly successful campaign in 2008 turn into the disaster it has become? I don’t think anyone believes that the nation has really undergone a mass conversion from liberalism to conservatism in the last two years. So how is it that just two years after the major democratic victories of 2008, democrats are now being thrown out of Washington in the largest numbers of most of our lifetimes?

The most common answer that I’ve heard is that “people are angry about the economy”. This may be partially true. But I highly doubt that the economy is really the main reason for this republican take-over. I think the main-stream media is blaming the economy for one reason: they still want to be able to blame Bush. Of course, the “it was Bush’s fault” platform has worn very, very thin over the last few years. Most people realize that with the Democrats controlling the house, senate, and the presidency, they really have no excuse for not getting done whatever is needed to correct whatever things they say Bush did wrong. But the blame-Bush platform is much better than the alternative.

What is the alternative that the liberal media doesn’t want to face? What are Americans really upset about? I don’t think it’s the economy. I think the nation is angry about the unbelievable wave of liberalism that’s swept the nation in the past two years. I think America is mad about congress ignoring the roughly 60% of Americans who were opposed to Obamacare and who still want it to be repealed. I think Americans are disgusted that we have such an incompetent, indulgent president. And I think most of all, Americans are finally being disillusioned about who Obama truly is.

When Americans voted for Obama in 2008, I don’t think they were voting for Obamacare, a trillion dollars of stimulus spending, a liberal foreign policy, etc. I think they were voting for a black charismatic “rock-star” with a young face, good personality, and general appeal. It’s sad to think of the American people being this stupid, but I truly believe that Obama’s charisma and personality, along with his race are what got him elected. If that’s the case, it means that Americans are a bunch of stupid, gullible, racist idolizers who are just waiting to find some celebrity to bow down to and worship. I’m sorry to be so critical of America. But this is simply the only explanation I can see for the events of the past two years.

It shouldn’t come as any surprise, really. After all, we live in a culture that’s celebrity driven. Good looks and good personality are all that is required for fame, fortune and popularity in nearly every other area of American culture; why shouldn’t we expect to see exactly the same things in politics? American Idol, the TV show in which the general viewing audience is asked to call in their votes for the winners of a talent show, is currently the most watched TV series and is also one of the most popular television shows of all time. It’s interesting to note that in the eight season of American Idol, a total of 624 million votes were cast for various performers, while the voter turnout in the presidential election a year before was only 132 million. Granted, viewers of American Idol can vote as many times as they want in a given two hour period, but the point is still an interesting one. The most popular TV show is a show where viewers get to vote for their favorite celebrity based on their looks and talent. Obviously, our culture cares a great deal about celebrities. Why shouldn’t we expect to see a spillover of the celebrity mania from entertainment into politics?

It is sad when such historic events as the elections in the last two years have to be explained away as the result of a culture too stupid to see past good looks and personality when deciding who the next leader of our nation will be. But there is some hope. First, only 52.9% of voters voted for Obama, which means that for whatever reason, the other 46.1% weren’t swept along in the wave of celebrity worship which landed Obama in the White House. And among the 52.9% who did vote for Obama, a large majority of those voters would vote for any liberal, regardless of how charismatic he or she is. So that means that a relatively small number of Obama voters were motivated purely by Obama idolization. This gives some hope, though it’s also quite sobering because it shows what a lot of damage just a (relatively) few stupid people can do.

Something that offers just a little bit more hope is what happened last Tuesday. Apparently, the people who were swept to the polls by Obama’s wave of charisma eventually did see through the façade of personality and catchy slogans, at least enough to vote against Obama’s liberal agenda and all of Obama’s many stupid mistakes. Hopefully, this is an indicator that the nation as a whole is not too far gone, at least not yet.

The next two years are going to be very interesting to watch. There are a lot of things that could go wrong for Republicans between now and then. Republicans need to watch their step in congress. It is absolutely critical for a Republican victory in 2012 that the Republicans stick to their guns, do not compromise or moderate, and do what the American people sent them there to do: repeal healthcare (or at least do as much as they can to stop it, which may be tricky without control of the senate). With any luck, the celebrity worshipers who got carried away with Obama in 2008 have learned their lesson, and won’t be so easily fooled again by catchy slogans and young faces in 2012.

Loyal readers/fans,

First of all, I want to apologize for such a long period of inactivity. Well, you all know how it is, I’m sure. You mean to write, but keep on putting it off and putting it off, until next thing you know, months have gone by since your last post. Well, that’s life.

I wanted to take some time tonight to talk about something Patrick Henry is quoted as saying: “Give me liberty or give me death.” Many people proudly quote this phrase and say that they too would have rather die than let their liberty be taken away. I’d like to see how this applies to a very front and center issue of today: health care.

Now, of course, our liberty has been being slowly disappearing over the last hundred years or so. But today, there is a very real, very serious threat to our liberty which endangers us all: socialized medicine. First of all, this is simply just a stupid idea. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that when the government runs an organization, quality goes down and cost goes up. And for that reason alone, I would think that the idea of socialized medicine would be almost universally laughed at. Unfortunately, due to the high levels of mass-stupidity which plague America today, there are many, many people who actually believe that a publically run health-care system is a good idea.

That’s bad enough, of course. But what makes it far worse are the provisions in the current health care bill which state that Americans will not be allowed to use a private health care option. Now, quite frankly, I find this terrifying. I am scared to death at the prospect of a government bureaucrat making my medical decisions for me. I don’t know of anyone who actually trusts the government to do a good job at anything. This, to me, makes the idea of mandatory government run healthcare seem completely, utterly absurd.

But beyond the seriousness, (and absurdity) of the situation, there’s a principle involved here that goes beyond the government doing a bad job at just about everything. A mandatory health-care system run by the government is quite possibly the most blatant disregard of individual liberty within the last hundred years in America. The right to control one’s own body; what medications go in, which treatments are used, etc. seems, to me at least, like an absolutely fundamental right that should NEVER be violated. And yet, we stand to lose that liberty if this current health care system proposed by President Obama becomes law.

So, I’d like to challenge you, my readers, on the issue of health care. Is it a fundamental right to control one’s own body? And if so, are we as Americans willing to stand behind Patrick Henry and join him in saying: Give me liberty, or give me death!

%d bloggers like this: