Mom4Truth

Robin Hood Obama, as Bill coined, seemed a little more comfortable tonight. Both parties did for that matter. I am now quasi-convinced that Barak actually believes (somewhat) this economic-utopic illusion someone told him to create. The reason I say “someone told him to create” is because he seems very well informed on what he claims to believe, but very unassured of himself or his ability to sell it. You can tell that he has been advised from other, left-wing, wing nut, no doubt, people that have convinced him that this is what is right for our country.  I think that even though he seemed more comfortable tonight, I don’t believe that it is because he truly understands that which he is trying to sell, more that he’s comfortable with the talking points given to him by campaign staffers that probably have more of the experience that he is so obviously lacking. He gets this deer in a head lamp look when asked a question he hadn’t been coached on. Bill caught him on a few of those in part 2 of this interview.  I think he sincerely just doesn’t know. Proof? How many times did he vote “Present” in senate? 130 times. Sure, most of those were probably political posturing, or sideswiping, so that he wouldn’t ruffle feathers amongst voters or community citizens he was trying to stay “in’ with. For example: “In 1999, Barack Obama was faced with a difficult vote in the Illinois legislature — to support a bill that would let some juveniles be tried as adults, a position that risked drawing fire from African-Americans, or to oppose it, possibly undermining his image as a tough-on-crime moderate.” New York Times. So- he effectively sideswiped it by voting “Present”. But I think in some cases, this ignorant man just doesn’t know. And who can blame him for not understanding it all- afterall, we’re all learning. However, we are not all running for President of the United States. And I don’t think I want this job to be “on-the-job” training for Mr. Obama. Not with my family’s well-being at stake, no thank you. Our economy has shown that the Bush tax cuts have given our government 20% more revenue! Yeah- that’s a “more”. Obama tries to say that is these very tax cuts that have caused our nation to have racked up a 4 trillion dollar debt. Obama could not give a sound reason for the ballooning debt. If he can’t explain the root of it, how can he come up with a way to stop it? First of all, I have to reiterate that he wants to take more of your money to try to control this problem. Truth? A war is quite costly and, as O’reilly stated, spending is out of control. The earmarks and pork-barrel spending have been out of control. This is exactly why a McCain administration would be so valuable for us. He stands strongly against both, putting the money back where it belongs- in our pockets. But, something really interesting, Obama was quoted as saying recently that he would continue the Bush tax cuts if our economy was still bad when he got elected. Hmmm….Bush tax cuts bad, costing us 4 trillion dollars? Bush tax cuts good in a bad economy? Bush tax cuts bad in a good economy? What, Barack? This implies that tax hikes are never good and like I always say, he is quite the flip-flopper. And this proves his inexperience and his inability to have strong convictions on which to stand. By the way guys, all democrats say they are going to cut taxes for the bottom group of people, in Obama’s case, it was 95% of people, and all democrats have proven that to be a lie. The point is- in a community that has raised taxes of any kind, the society shrivels. Obama’s examples and comments proved that he believes in socialism and income redistribution, i.e. the comparison between him and a waitress. If he has more money, why not give more? In O’Reilly’s words- there is no free lunch! Obama again states that in our current economy people are struggling to pay their bills. I’m so tired of him peddaling this crap. Why is it the government’s, yours and my responsibility to bail these people out? Where’s the concept of personal responsibility to not buy things you can’t afford? If someone is really in need, then there are programs for that, but just because someone buys a house they can’t afford or gets one too many credit cards, I do not support our paying for this. Now at this point, the readers of my blog who work, pay their own way, and care to budget their money are getting this, but for those of you who live off of our money, I’m sure I’m going to get an earfull. People that are lazy and don’t want to take care of their own bills will naturally vote for Obama. The tax hikes won’t effect them except to give them more government fluff. You’re welcome! Why would people be so inclined to attain wealth in our capitalist society if they are unable to truly reap the benefits? Putting the government in charge of and administering charity is a very bad plan. He says sewer lines are crumbling- that is not the responsibility of the federal government- it is a responsibility of local taxes and local government, but he can disguise his tax hikes by using seemingly necessary “repairs” and what not. Obama is definitely not a federalist nor a capitalist, rather a socialist who ultimately believes in one-world unity leaving we Americans exposed to the harsh wilderness that is the rest of the world, most of which are 3rd would countries who subscribe to Islam. Even if, as he says, tax hikes were truly reserved for just the wealthy, then we are still in trouble because it is the wealthy who start businesses and the “trickle”, and they will refuse to invest in small business which will murder our economy. See, both socialism and capitalism believe in the trickle effect, however, one, socialism, teaches that we are baffoons and the government should take as much as they can and decide where to place that trickle- most often in the hands of criminals and drug addicts who can’t or won’t work and want the “government”, meaning you and me, to fund them, thus starting the very expensive government trickle. Capitalism teaches, and has taught, successfully, might I add, that an economy where people are encouraged and inspired to earn and spend and invest that the trickle effect of that spending and investing will benefit all. Socialism sounds great at the onslaught, considering that you’re just helping out, but it has maimed every society who has tried it. This is a startling contrast between the liberal left and the conservative right- one believes in utopia and believes the government should control everything, every aspect of our lives, and the other sees reality, that in a free society where people are encouraged through self-responsibility and accountability, society, as a whole, thrives. You will always have the poor amongst you, in Jesus’s words, but it is not the responsibility of the government to mandate that a portion of my hard-earned money goes to them. Worth noting as well is that people would much rather give freely out of their excess than for the government to yank it and force their hand. This way, those that are truly in need, receive, but those that refuse to work and let the government (us) foot the bill- that’s reality and that’s wrong. We do not want a communist government!

So- Bill O’Reilly held his own tonight and did a nice job of calling him out. Unfortunately for Obama, he seems to know what he believes, but is obviously very inexperienced. Round II- O’Reilly!

By the way, guys, worth mentioning. During the interview last week, I was rather annoyed that O’Reilly used this stage as a time to bond with Obama over the fact that he disagreed with our going into Iraq in the first place. Gag.