Archive of posts filed under the Obama category.

Sturmabteilung? Or Schutzstaffel?

Posted by on

Barack Obama wants a “civilian national security force.”

Not the National Guard. Not the Reserves. But a new force.

We cannot continue to rely only on our military in order to achieve the national security objective that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

What was that organization that Adolf Hitler had? Sturmabteilung? You know, the “Brown Shirts.”

Or maybe he wants to go straight to the Schutzstaffel, the “SS.”

Are those of us on the right the only ones that ever read books? Or that watched the Nazi shows on the History Channel instead of their “Search for Bigfoot” or “Roswell Uncovered” shows? Or that can think for ourselves?

1

The Fairness Doctrine

Posted by on

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has, for the most part, supported many of the policies of President Bush. Not all the time, but most of the time.

The Obama campaign has used this against McCain in the election. And that’s fair. It’s not as it’s being presented, but still, McCain’s support of many of the President’s policies is a fair issue.

So let’s talk fair.

You’ve heard of the “Fairness Doctrine,” I’m sure. It was generally applied by the “Equal Time” rule, though that in and of itself was not the “Fairness Doctrine.”

However, the “Equal Time” rule that many broadcasters applied was generally good enough to meet FCC policies (the “Fairness Doctrine”). Heck, I even used it once to ask for — and receive — equal time to respond to an editorial on my hometown radio station back in the 1970s.

Either way, it meant that if you presented one side of a controversial argument, you had an obligation to present the other side. Not equal time, but an opposing view nonetheless.

Many on the left want to bring the Fairness Doctrine back. But whether or not it’s brought back isn’t actually the topic.

It’s the general idea of fairness.

Like I said, McCain’s support of the policies of Bush is a fair issue. My own take is that, if George W. Bush and John S. McCain agree on something, it’s probably a good thing. But that’s just me.

Let’s consider what else is fair.

How about … the policies of Barack Obama?

Since he has such a short resumé, you don’t have as much to look at. So, when you look at what’s there, you better look close.

And that’s why Obama’s votes to raise taxes on those making $42K a year is important. It’s not what he’s preaching right now, but it’s what he’s done. I choose to believe what a man has done more that what he says. His votes to raise taxes are fair game.

And, because his record is so small, you have to look closely at all kinds of things to figure out just who this guy is.

As for McCain, I have a friend that used to live in Arizona. She says that well before he came into the national spotlight, he was just like he is today. Like him or hate him, he’s honest and is straight with you, not telling you what he thinks you want to hear, but what he thinks you need to hear.

Obama? He’s saying things that don’t match up to his record.

He’s denied a relationship with Bill Ayers, but that doesn’t match the facts. And that question is fair.

Obama says he doesn’t want to raise your taxes, but he wants to eliminate the Bush tax cuts that will … get this … have the effect of raising your taxes. And that’s a fair topic.

Obama wants to “spread the wealth around” … and that’s socialism, plain and simple. And that’s a fair topic for discussion.

Obama has called the U. S. Constitution a “fundamentally flawed” document. Not a document that contains flaws that can be corrected by amendments, but “fundamentally flawed.” His statements are a fair topic for discussion.

I could go on and on. And probably will. Just not right now.

If anyone wants to institute a “fairness doctrine,” it should begin with a fair look at Barack Obama.

Anyone American who takes a fair look at Barack Obama will be appalled by what he sees.

1

Obama says take the day off to campaign for him

Posted by on

Barack Obama says he wants his supporters to take the day off work to campaign for him on election day:

Can you take next Tuesday off from work, join the final push, and make sure that everyone who supports Barack turns out to vote?

That got me to thinking…

If none of the Obama supporters showed up for work on November 4th, would anyone really notice?

1

Spread the wealth around

Posted by on

“Spread the wealth around.”

That’s Barack Obama’s plan. But it’s not a new plan. There are many, many ways to spread the wealth around.

Karl Marx
From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

Don Corleone
I’m gonna make him an offer he can’t refuse.

50 cent
It ain’t easy to make money, so now everybody wanna take money…

Obama and Joe The Plumber
I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they’ve got a chance at success, too. I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.

Now, what’s the difference in these plans?

Well, if it’s your wealth that somebody takes to spread around to someone else … nothing. No difference at all.

1

Just look at the community he organized

Posted by on

During this election season, some of us on the right have asked about Barack Obama, “Just what does a community organizer do?”

And we’ve been criticized as “racist” for asking such a thing.

Well, I for one, no longer need to ask what a community organizer does.

It’s obvious that he makes a difference in his community.

And what was Barack Obama’s community?

Chicago.

You’ve heard of Chicago, right? The murder capital of the United States.

Just think: as President, Obama can do for your community what he did for Chicago.

“Change We Need?” My big ol’ butt.

1

Socialist

Posted by on

“From each according to his ability to each according to his need.”

The words of Karl Marx.

And the meaning of the words of Barack Obama:

“Spread the wealth around,” he said.

“Spread the wealth around?”

Take your wealth (“from each according to his ability”) and spread it around (“to each according to his need”).

Way to go, Obama. Karl Marx would be proud.

1

Don’t question Obama’s patriotism

Posted by on

Don’t question Barack Obama’s patriotism.

Ignore the fact that a recent campaign stop in Londonderry, New Hampshire, had scheduled a high school senior, Zach Bencal, to sing the National Anthem. Then canceled the National Anthem to make room for something more important:

Bencal, who sings the anthem for a number of school events and is actively involved in local community theatre, had been contacted by the Obama campaign to sing the anthem. He agreed to do so, then was told later in the evening the anthem had been scratched from the program. Bencal said he was told by the campaign the decision was a simple programming change to make room for another speaker.

Even though the National Anthem isn’t that important to him, don’t question his patriotism.

Ignore the Senator not putting his hand over his heart during the playing of the National Anthem during an Indianola, Iowa, campaign stop in September, 2007:

Despite that, don’t question his patriotism.

Ignore his long history with terrorists Bill Ayers, who bombed NYC police headquarters, the Pentagon, and the U.S. Capitol. The same Bill Ayers in whose living room Obama held one of his first ever campaign appearances. The same Bill Ayers who served on boards with Obama. The same Bill Ayers who lives in the same neighborhood as Obama. The same Bill Ayers who has exchanged hundreds of thousands of dollars with Obama.

But don’t question Obama’s patriotism, we’re told.

So, I won’t.

But, if you’re voting for Barack Obama, I’m questioning yours.