On CNN Tuesday night, October 7th, after the debate, David Gergen stated, "I think it's too early to declare victory, because Barack Obama is black, and until we play out the issue of race in this country, I don't think we'll know and maybe (not until) late in the campaign."
Huh? Once again, Americans are racist and Obama will only loose if the racists don't vote for him. Is that what we are to believe?
While on Anderson Cooper 360 Degrees on Tuesday, October 7th, James Carville stated, "Let me be clear, I said you can call the dogs and light the fire and leave the house. I think it sounds over. Now let me be clear here, if Obama goes in this race with a five point lead and loses this election, the consequences are -- bull, man. I mean I don't think that's going to happen...
...But you stop and contemplate this country if Obama goes in and he has a consistent five point lead and loses the election, it would be very, very, very dramatic out there."
So, are we to believe there will be rioting in the streets if Obama doesn't win because the polls say he should? Please, say it isn't so. Does anyone really think the polls matter? It has been proven that the polls are weighted toward Democrat voters by a 39.3% to 33.3% and 27.4% for Republicans and unaffiliated voters respectively.
Then today, Congressman John Murtha (yes, the same John Murtha who accused our soldiers of murdering innoncent Iraqi's) accused his own constituents in western Pennsylvania of being racists and said that they could reduce Obama's margin of victory by 4 percentage points.
In an interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Mr. Murtha stated, "There is no question that western Pennsylvania is a racist area."
According to the Associated Press, "Murtha said it has taken time for many Pennsylvania voters to come around to embracing a black presidential candidate, but that Obama should still win the state, though not in a runaway."
The left is even accusing Sarah Palin of being a racist because she has the audacity to do what the main stream media has refused to do…look at Obama’s record and his associations…and because she speaks to small town America. So, because she speaks to us, she’s a racist and therefore, we must be racist as well…we, the biter Americans, who cling to our guns and religion.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I am sick and tired of being told that if I don’t vote for Obama I’m a racist…how absolutely pathetic.
It can’t possibly be because I’m a conservative and he is the most liberal Democrat in the Senate with the second most liberal Democrat as his running mate or because his running mate has been a Washington insider for almost 36 years…yet they say they are running a campaign of change.
It can't possibly be because I don't agree with him on one single issue.
It can't possibly be because he is a tax and spend liberal who plans on adding approximately $1.3 trillion in new spending over his first term. This country is already too far in debt. We need to cut spending. We can not afford another trillion or more in new spending.
It can’t possibly be because his promises to cut taxes for 95% of Americans (even though approximately 33% of Americans already pay zero taxes) is an empty and impossible promise since he is also promising to increase spending by $1.3 trillion. There is no way 5% of Americans can pick up that tab.
It can’t possibly be because I believe his tax policies are technically just more social welfare for the lower income people at the expense of those who have spent their own time and money to achieve success. Or that his tax policies will only increase people’s dependency on the Federal government and less on themselves.
It can't possibly be because he not only supports abortion, but he has promised to sign into law the "Freedom of Choice Act" which, according to Senator Barbara Boxer, a co-sponser of the bill, "supercedes any law, regulation or local ordinance that impinges on a woman’s right to choose. That means a poor woman cannot be denied the use of Medicaid if she chooses to have an abortion." So, in other words, if the bill were to be signed into law, state and federal governments would be mandated to use taxpayer funds to provide abortions.
It can’t possibly be because his policies on national security are so radical that 9/11 will pale in comparison to what our enemies will be able to accomplish on our homeland.
If you think I’m kidding here’s what he said he would do in October, 2007 in a video presentation to the non-profit group "Caucus for Priorities":
"I am the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning and as President, I will end it.
Second, I will cut 10's of billions of dollars in wasteful spending. I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space. I will slow our development of future combat systems and I will institute an independent defense priorities board to insure that the quadrenial defense review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.
Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal I will not seek to develop new nuclear weapons. I will seek a global ban on production of fissile material and will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBM's off hair trigger alert and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenal."
I don't know about you, but this does not give me a sense of security. Does Obama realize that Russia and Venezuela just held naval war games south of our borders? Does he realize that China controls the Panama Canal? Does he realize that Iran is rumored to have a submarine capable of carrying nuclear weapons? So, when the Russians or Venezuelans or Chinese or Iranians or others come calling we'll more than likely be defending ourselves because the government under President Obama will be unable to. Where's my gun and where do I sign up for the Oregon militia?
It can't possibly be because he has been irresponsible in his comments about our troops. Here's what he said about our US soldiers and marines in Afghanistan on August 14, 2007, "Now you have narco drug lords who are helping to finance the Taliban, so we’ve got to get the job done there, and that requires us to have enough troops that we are not just air raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous problems there." And he wants to be their Commander in Chief?
It can't possibly be because he wants the government to take control of the nation's health care system...a government that can't even manage the institutions it already controls; education, social security, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac. Do we really want them to handle our health care as well? How long will it be before health care benefits are rationed or limited?
Could the Obama health plan end up like the Oregon Health Plan (OHP); a government subsidized health plan for poor and low-income families?
During the Clinton administration it was hoped that the new OHP would serve as a model for a possible federal health plan. However, due to budget cuts, OHP has begun to limit access to the plan.
Earlier this year the Oregon Center for Public Policy (OCCP) was urging, "poor, uninsured Oregonians to sign up for the Oregon Health Plan (OHP) reservation list. Signing up for the list enters uninsured adults in a monthly lottery to apply for the subsidized health insurance plan.
'This is the only kind of lottery that’s totally devoted to helping poor Oregonians,' said OCPP executive director Chuck Sheketoff.
Starting today and continuing through February 29, the Oregon Department of Human Services (DHS) will be accepting reservations for a lottery for new slots in the Oregon Health Plan, Oregon’s Medicaid program.
Those on the reservation list will enter a monthly lottery in which people will be randomly chosen and invited to apply for the Oregon Health Plan. DHS will initially draw 3,000 names, and then a declining number in subsequent months until the program reaches its budgeted level of an average of 24,000 per month for the two-year budget period.
OCPP is encouraging all adult Oregonians who believe they might qualify for the OHP slots to put their names on the reservation list...
...OCPP is also encouraging health care providers, social service agencies, and family and friends of the uninsured to sign up people for the reservation list."
In addition the Oregon Health Plan fell under serious criticism this past July. According to the Oregonian, "The conflict came to light in a recent report in The Register-Guard of Eugene. The newspaper described the sad plight of Barbara Wagner, a 64-year-old Springfield woman with lung cancer.
After her oncologist prescribed a cancer drug that would cost $4,000 a month, the newspaper reported, 'Wagner was notified that the Oregon Health Plan wouldn't cover the treatment, but that it would cover palliative, or comfort, care, including, if she chose, doctor-assisted suicide.
That presents an unacceptable conflict. The state health program should not be in the position of denying chemotherapy to terminally ill patients while offering to pay the cost of helping them die.'"
Do we seriuosly want a health system where bureaucrats, instead of doctors, could end up deciding what health care we can receive? Do we want a health care system where bureaucrats could decide whether we live or die?
Not me. I'll keep my inexpensive catastrophic health plan....even as limited as it is.
As I have pointed out, there are many reasons to not vote for Obama, which have nothing to do with race. The left needs to get off this issue or they may be scratching their heads on November 5th and be left wondering what happened to their "Messiah"...at least that's what I am praying for.
No comments:
Post a Comment