It likely is surprising to most faithful JMO readers that I've been holding my tongue with such a close, contentious, and convoluted campaign season. Well, with only three more days until we know who will take the oath of office in January it is time for me to share my thoughts.
My purpose for the following multi-post adventure is two-fold: Primarily, if there are any "undecided" voters reading this, I hope to provide you with well thought-out, reasoned, logical, and persuasive arguments to cast your vote for any candidate other than Barack Obama. Secondarily, I hope that the opinions and facts that I will be sharing would cause some voters who consider themselves supporters of the President to actually consider changing their minds regarding the candidate for whom they will vote. I believe the latter to be less likely, but a blogger can dream, can't he?
Table of Contents:
Why We Voted for President Obama
Things Said During the 2008 Campaign
Scare Tactics
Time's Up
Unity and Disunity
Questionable Definitions
Obama's Record
Michelle's Spending
Lawn Signs
Why We Voted for President Obama
I'd like to direct the first portion of this post to those of my readers who voted for Barack Obama in 2008. In 2008, we were looking at unemployment at completely unacceptable levels, rising gas prices, a weak housing market, a stock market that was struggling, an economy headed in the wrong direction, and we could point to specific policies put in place by the party in power and reasoned that they neeed to go. The reason I mention is this: We have the exact same reasons to vote Barack Obama out of office.
Things Said During the 2008 Campaign
The truth of the matter is that, in the past, President Obama has said some very true things. Particularly while campaigning for, and early in his term as, President in 2008 and 2009. In the speech he gave accepting the Democratic nomination for President he said this, "If you don't have any fresh ideas, then you use stale tactics to scare voters. If you don't have a record to run on, then you paint your opponent as someone people should run from." Does this resonate with anyone? Does this not sound like nearly every strategy eminating from the Obama campaign since day one of this election season?
Scare Tactics
All I've heard from Obama is scare tactics regarding his opponent. "A $5 Trillion dollar tax cut for the wealthy." "No real plan." "He won't deal harshly with China." "He'll ship our jobs overseas." "He's a Mormon." "He'll end Medicare as we know it." "He'll outlaw abortion." etc etc etc. Barack Obama doesn't have a record to run on, so he's trying to frighten people away from voting for Mitt Romney. He's trying to create a scenario where staying with the person who hasn't done the job as well as we'd hoped is still better than someone who will really foul things up. But this is completely illogical. "The devil we know..." We know that the President has been unable to right the economy in a reasonable amount of time; so, clearly, it makes more sense to bring in someone new. The chance of improvement is better than the guarantee of status quo. Bringing this full circle back to my first point: Obama's philosophy behind his original election campaign is the exact philosophy that should unseat him on Tuesday. The sitting party couldn't get us out of this mess, we need a change.
Look, if Mitt is elected, doesn't live up to his campaign promises, and ends up doing all of the things that Obama is claiming he's going to do, then I'll vote him out of office myself.
Time's Up
Which is exactly what President Obama predicted very early in his tenure as President. He admitted that he had three years to turn this ship around and if he was unable to do so, this would be a "one term proposition." Well, let's hold him accountable to that. Four years is more than enough time to turn an economy around. Even if it isn't back to where it started, the trending should be upward. Which it's not.
Let's take this out of the policital realm for a moment. The Boston Red Sox recently fired Manager Bobby Valentine after just one season. They said the following regarding their decision: "Bobby was dealt a difficult hand. He did the best he could under seriously adverse circumstances... He was dealt with a lot of difficult issues and things happened outside of his control. But we are where we are, and the results weren't good and we are looking to move forward." Even the Red Sox understood that, regardless the hand that was dealt ("It's Bush's Fault"), it is appropriate to expect a certain level of results in a certain amount of time. Bobby didn't meet the Red Sox expectations and the President hasn't met ours.
And for those who like to point the finger at the Republicans in the House for standing in the President's way, don't forget he had two years of complete control. The Democrats had a filibuster proof majority and they did next to nothing.
Sunday, November 04, 2012
2012 Voting Booth Vol. V
Unity and Disunity
In 2008 President Obama achieved votes through a message of unity. "Change we can believe in." I find it very telling that the only way President Obama can achieve votes this time around is by creating disunity among the American electorate. He declares that there is a "war against women" by the Republicans. He pits the lower, and middle class against the "super rich." He squares "The working man" against evil "huge corporations." And then he declares that "Voting is the best revenge." Revenge against what? Against your fellow American's who see things differently than you?! Nothing like bringing the country together by tearing it apart to stay in office.
The disunity that he is projecting is so great it permeates other public arenas. Following Hurricane Sandy a reporter asked the utilities representative if they were dragging their feet regarding the restoration of power to a major Connecticut city because they were focusing more on the wealthier areas of the state (What liberal media?). This doesn't even make any sense! Cities are more densely populated. Restoring power to a city block brings in much more income from kilowatt hours than restoring power to a single big house. But this class warfare is what the country's "leadership" is spouting and it trickles down to all areas.
Questionable Definitions
One tactic that the Democrats are exercising to create this disunity is by using familiar words with unique definitions. A prime example is the term "access." President Obama and his liberal friends have been fond of phrase "The Republicans want to take away your access to birth control." Bing defines "access" (as it applies in this sentence) as "opportunity to use." The President defines "access" in this sentence as "paid for by the Federal Government." No Republican is going to remove birth control from the shelves of CVS and Walgreens around the country. That's removing our access. No Republican is going to prevent hospitals from offering emergency contraceptives to rape victims. That's removing access. Not paying for it is not removing access. It's removing government funded access.
Another unique definition was used by the President during the first speech when he was discussing his grandmother. He said of her, "[My grandmother] was fiercely independent. She worked her way up, only had a high school education, started as a secretary, ended up being the vice president of a local bank. And she ended up living alone by choice. And the reason she could be independent was because of Social Security and Medicare." Apparently, according to liberals. "Fierce independence" means complete dependence on the Federal Government. If his grandmother truly were independent, she would not have had to rely on anyone (or any program) because of her own responsible planning and saving while she was the VP of the bank. And this is the end goal of the Democrats. Complete and utter dependence on the Federal Government. They believe this is the answer to our country's issues. The problem is: dependence does not breed opportunity.
These are just a few examples of how President Obama is using questionable definitions (basically lying to the American public) in a attempt to cling to power.
In 2008 President Obama achieved votes through a message of unity. "Change we can believe in." I find it very telling that the only way President Obama can achieve votes this time around is by creating disunity among the American electorate. He declares that there is a "war against women" by the Republicans. He pits the lower, and middle class against the "super rich." He squares "The working man" against evil "huge corporations." And then he declares that "Voting is the best revenge." Revenge against what? Against your fellow American's who see things differently than you?! Nothing like bringing the country together by tearing it apart to stay in office.
The disunity that he is projecting is so great it permeates other public arenas. Following Hurricane Sandy a reporter asked the utilities representative if they were dragging their feet regarding the restoration of power to a major Connecticut city because they were focusing more on the wealthier areas of the state (What liberal media?). This doesn't even make any sense! Cities are more densely populated. Restoring power to a city block brings in much more income from kilowatt hours than restoring power to a single big house. But this class warfare is what the country's "leadership" is spouting and it trickles down to all areas.
Questionable Definitions
One tactic that the Democrats are exercising to create this disunity is by using familiar words with unique definitions. A prime example is the term "access." President Obama and his liberal friends have been fond of phrase "The Republicans want to take away your access to birth control." Bing defines "access" (as it applies in this sentence) as "opportunity to use." The President defines "access" in this sentence as "paid for by the Federal Government." No Republican is going to remove birth control from the shelves of CVS and Walgreens around the country. That's removing our access. No Republican is going to prevent hospitals from offering emergency contraceptives to rape victims. That's removing access. Not paying for it is not removing access. It's removing government funded access.
Another unique definition was used by the President during the first speech when he was discussing his grandmother. He said of her, "[My grandmother] was fiercely independent. She worked her way up, only had a high school education, started as a secretary, ended up being the vice president of a local bank. And she ended up living alone by choice. And the reason she could be independent was because of Social Security and Medicare." Apparently, according to liberals. "Fierce independence" means complete dependence on the Federal Government. If his grandmother truly were independent, she would not have had to rely on anyone (or any program) because of her own responsible planning and saving while she was the VP of the bank. And this is the end goal of the Democrats. Complete and utter dependence on the Federal Government. They believe this is the answer to our country's issues. The problem is: dependence does not breed opportunity.
These are just a few examples of how President Obama is using questionable definitions (basically lying to the American public) in a attempt to cling to power.
2012 Voting Booth Vol. VI
President Obama's Record
President Obama has four major "accomplishments" on which he's attempting to rest his laurels:
First: the stimulus package. President Obama theorized that the stimulus package would halt unemployment and bring it back down to a more reasonable level much faster than without a stimulus. Here is a graph showing what unemployment would have done without the stimulus, what President Obama told the American public would happen with his stimulus, and what actually happened.
This isn't something to be proud of. It's something to shy away from. What can we expect if reelected? Another stimulus.
Second: President Obama clearly enjoys stating that he saved GM from bankruptcy while Mitt Romney would have allowed them to go through bankruptcy. Here's the difficulty with that. GM was not saved from bankruptcy; it was merely delayed for a while. GM is headed back into bankruptcy. I hope Obama liked giving a bailout to GM, because if he's reelected, he'll likely do it again.
Third: President Obama brought down Osama Bin Laden. Whomever created the following analogy hit the nail right on the head: "Barak Obama taking credit for killing Bin Laden is like Richard Nixon taking credit for the moon landing." Yes, this happened on your watch, no you can't take credit for it. Just like Grant couldn't take credit for the transcontinental railroad just because he was sitting in the Oval Office when they drove in the golden spike. If Obama wants to run for reelection on those laurels he might as well add "Kentucky is the NCAA Final Four Champion." It happened, and you watched it, but you didn't have a whole lot to do with it.
Fourth: Obamacare. First it's not a tax. Then the only way it's Constitutional is by being a tax. Not only that, but a tax with no fewer than 20 tax increases. And as if that weren't enough. American's don't want it.
The four legs on which President Obama has built his reelection record are either splintered, weak, or missing.
Of course, for some reason I don't hear much from the "non-liberal" media regarding the President's failures. One of the most egregious being the issue in Libya. Report after report expose that the security forces asked for more support and were flatly denied. And because of this four American citizens were killed on American soil by terrorists. And when asked about this travesty and tragedy in regards to the overall "Arab Spring" the President referred to these murders as "Bumps in the road." He has allowed his Secretary of State Hilary Clinton to end her own Presidential aspirations by "taking responsibility" for the Libyan failure. Of course, no one has been fired or relieved of command. So while she may be "taking responsibility." No one is being held accountable.
President Obama has four major "accomplishments" on which he's attempting to rest his laurels:
First: the stimulus package. President Obama theorized that the stimulus package would halt unemployment and bring it back down to a more reasonable level much faster than without a stimulus. Here is a graph showing what unemployment would have done without the stimulus, what President Obama told the American public would happen with his stimulus, and what actually happened.
Second: President Obama clearly enjoys stating that he saved GM from bankruptcy while Mitt Romney would have allowed them to go through bankruptcy. Here's the difficulty with that. GM was not saved from bankruptcy; it was merely delayed for a while. GM is headed back into bankruptcy. I hope Obama liked giving a bailout to GM, because if he's reelected, he'll likely do it again.
Third: President Obama brought down Osama Bin Laden. Whomever created the following analogy hit the nail right on the head: "Barak Obama taking credit for killing Bin Laden is like Richard Nixon taking credit for the moon landing." Yes, this happened on your watch, no you can't take credit for it. Just like Grant couldn't take credit for the transcontinental railroad just because he was sitting in the Oval Office when they drove in the golden spike. If Obama wants to run for reelection on those laurels he might as well add "Kentucky is the NCAA Final Four Champion." It happened, and you watched it, but you didn't have a whole lot to do with it.
Fourth: Obamacare. First it's not a tax. Then the only way it's Constitutional is by being a tax. Not only that, but a tax with no fewer than 20 tax increases. And as if that weren't enough. American's don't want it.
The four legs on which President Obama has built his reelection record are either splintered, weak, or missing.
Of course, for some reason I don't hear much from the "non-liberal" media regarding the President's failures. One of the most egregious being the issue in Libya. Report after report expose that the security forces asked for more support and were flatly denied. And because of this four American citizens were killed on American soil by terrorists. And when asked about this travesty and tragedy in regards to the overall "Arab Spring" the President referred to these murders as "Bumps in the road." He has allowed his Secretary of State Hilary Clinton to end her own Presidential aspirations by "taking responsibility" for the Libyan failure. Of course, no one has been fired or relieved of command. So while she may be "taking responsibility." No one is being held accountable.
2012 Voting Booth Vol. VII
My final two thoughts are admittedly not as crucial, but still interesting.
Michelle's Spending
The President's irresponsible spending doesn't end with him and his policies. It extends to his wife. She has spent over $10 million of public money on vacations. And her spending doesn't end there. She has more assistants than any other First Lady in history. To top it all off, the salaries of those assistants is notably higher than any previous administration. You can compare Michelle Obama's staffs' salaries to those of Laura Bush's here.
Lawn Signs
Finally, I find it curious as I drive around all areas of Connecticut that the businesses brave enough to display political lawn signs on their property are nearly unanimously for Romney/Ryan (and Linda McMahon, the Republican running for Senate). These are small businesses run by middle class people. Why is it that the people who know how to run a business, and who know a thing or two about money and finances are not supporting the President?
We gave him a chance, and he gave it the "ole college try." His best wasn't good enough and it's time for new leadership.
Honestly, I'd be amazed if anyone has joined me for this entire adventure. You've read my opinions. What are yours?
Michelle's Spending
The President's irresponsible spending doesn't end with him and his policies. It extends to his wife. She has spent over $10 million of public money on vacations. And her spending doesn't end there. She has more assistants than any other First Lady in history. To top it all off, the salaries of those assistants is notably higher than any previous administration. You can compare Michelle Obama's staffs' salaries to those of Laura Bush's here.
Lawn Signs
Finally, I find it curious as I drive around all areas of Connecticut that the businesses brave enough to display political lawn signs on their property are nearly unanimously for Romney/Ryan (and Linda McMahon, the Republican running for Senate). These are small businesses run by middle class people. Why is it that the people who know how to run a business, and who know a thing or two about money and finances are not supporting the President?
We gave him a chance, and he gave it the "ole college try." His best wasn't good enough and it's time for new leadership.
Honestly, I'd be amazed if anyone has joined me for this entire adventure. You've read my opinions. What are yours?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)