About Me

Name: eRevolution.us
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 

Who Should I Vote For?

"Should I vote for Barack Obama?"

"Should I vote for John McCain?"

If you're looking for some last-minute answers before you cast your vote, you may want to check outeRevolution's 5 reasons to say "No" to Barack Obama and his brand of change.  Click to see the evidence that...


I've tried to be as objective as possible with these, and except for #5, I think I've succeeded (#5 does involve some "gut feelings" as well as some verifiable facts).  And on the surface, I realize that all five of these sound a little extreme - but as you'll see for yourself, they aren't far from the truth.

Leave your comments - and more importantly, go out and vote for freedom, regardless of what the press has told you the outcome will be.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

You Can't Survive Without Obama!

The best reason I can think of NOT to vote for Obama:

He doesn't believe you can make it without government intervention.

America didn't become the wealthiest nation in the world on accident.  The values, ideals and inspiration of our founding fathers set off of torrent of optimism, self-reliance, hard work, and innovation that propelled the U.S. forward (carrying the rest of the world with it). 

That's not to say that other countries haven't made contributions as well, but let's face it - for the last century, America has driven the world forward:

- in the defense of freedom
- in increasingly-equal and ever-greater opportunities for all
- in technology and invention
- in education and research
- in lifestyle enhancements and living standards
- in medicine
- in social justice and charity work.

What brought about this juggernaut of prosperity?

It is a belief embedded deep in the DNA of Americans, a belief that still compells millions to immigrate to our nation -- that success requires personal responsiblity, that anything is possible with hard work and creativity.

Not "if we all work together."
Not "as long as the government helps me out."
Not "if we spread the wealth around."

What made America great was self-reliance - that people understood their moral obligation to provide for themselves and their families, to forge a better future for their kids, and to protect their freedom, with their very lives if necessary.

Do you want to be rich?  Figure out something other people want and deliver it to them.
Do you want a new house?  Work hard and make it happen.
Do you want your kids to enjoy a better life than you had?  It's possible in America.  
Do you want enough so that you have extra to share?  Get creative and do what it takes.
Do you want a world-class education?  Work and sacrifice to make it happen.

And that is precisely what Americans have done for more than 200 years.

Americans embody INDEPENDENCE - not just in their founding documents, but in their souls.

Barack Obama doesn't share that worldview with us.  He's from the radical left of the Democratic party - a small but powerful minority that sees America in a very different light:

- as a source of misery and injustice to the world
- as a place of fundamental unfairness and prejudice
- as a haven for greed without compassion
- as a needy nation without hope (except for government socialism)

Obama really believes that you need him if you're going to succeed.  He believes that you can't make it on your own - unless someone presumably smarter than you rigs the system for your benefit.  He believes that you are limited and small, waiting for a check from the government to bail you out of your miserable life.

Where average Americans see opportunity, Obama-types see unfairness.  Where average Americans see potential, this radical group sees helplessness.  Where average Americans see an opporutnity for genuine charity, these radicals see another victimized group to exploit for votes in the name of compassion.

Obama doesn't believe that you can stand up and win great victories for your future - that you can roll up your sleeves and become anything you want to be - that you can work yourself out of any mess and through diligence and innovation find prosperity. 

He'll say you can do all those things - but only with some extra help from people like him.  Only if the hard-earned wealth of others gets "spread" in your direction.

The government doesn't need to be involved in my life - "helping me" and "lifting me" and "rescuing me."  I'm an American!  Get out of my way!  And if I need help or rescue, I won't knock on the federal government's door and be forever beholden to them - I'll look to my family, my church, or my community for help.  

The Feds should keep their noses out of my business, my checkbook, my healthcare, my education and my decisions. Protect my freedom, provide a rule of law, keep my taxes as low as you can, and follow the freakin Constitution.  That would be the sort of change I could believe in.

What does freedom mean?  It's the ability to live my own life; it's the ability to choose my own path - without some do-gooder bureaucrat preaching what I can and can't do.  Or robbing my neighbors' paycheck to hand me something I didn't earn. 

I'll pursue happiness on my own, thank you.


The best reason not to vote for Barack Obama: you don't need him.

You don't need him telling you that you're not good enough to make your own way.
You don't need him telling you that you'll fail without the government's help.
You don't need him telling you that your country is the problem with your life.
You don't need him telling you that patriotism equals higher taxes and more regulations.
You don't need him telling you to hand off personal responsiblities to the government.

Reclaim the spirit of 1776, America!  You need less government, not more.

Let freedom ring tomorrow.

Tags: obama   vote  
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Obama Will Violate the Constitution

He plans to violate the U.S Constitution. 

Now, admittedly, most of today’s politicians are at fault on this one, but Obama takes it to a new level.  His ideas about the role of government in private life, particularly regarding the redistribution of wealth, are completely at odds with the U.S. Constitution, a document written specifically to limit the powers and reach of the Federal government.

For example, Obama wants to use the Federal tax code as a way of redistributing wealth from richer to poorer folks, by raising taxes on the upper income people and crediting “negative tax” to those lower on the scale.  (Negative taxes mean that rather than the poor simply paying no taxes [essentially what happens now], the poor actually receive money from the rich, via the IRS, on April 15.)

Now, whether or not you think this idea has merit (we can argue Socialism and Marxism later), such “equalizing of wealth” is not a power granted by the Constitution to the Federal government.  In Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, our Founders gave specific powers to the Federal government, none of which even hint at enforced “fairness,” social spending, etc.

As if that weren’t clear enough, some patriots at our nation’s founding worried that the Federal government might not interpret this list of granted powers as the limit of their reach, but the beginning of it.  They feared that the Federal government would grow beyond the scope they intended, and become just as controlling, taxing and tyrannical as the British crown.  So, they insisted on the 10th Amendment, the last statement in the Bill of Rights:

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Now, I freely admit that politicians on both sides of the aisle have conveniently ignored this Amendment – this right – of the people.

Obama correctly asserts that he wants change in America – but his sort of change is precisely opposite of our founding documents.  That means that if/when he stands to proclaim his oath of office, to “preserve, protect and defend” the Constitution, he’ll be lying, plain and simple.

He has no intention of preserving or protecting Article I, Section 8, nor does he plan to defend the 10th Amendment.  In fact, his policy ideas may be America’s final step away from its Constitution.

So, what does this all mean?

1.  If Americans really believe that social spending and “spreading the wealth” should be functions of the Federal government, then they need to pass a Constitutional Amendment that grants this power to Congress, or write a new constitution that includes socialist values.  Our current Constitution has a viable amendment process, whereby the States agree to a “change of terms” in the agreement that binds them together as “United States.”

2.  As it stands today, the individual States could (and do) implement such changes on their own, but based on the 10th Amendment, the Federal government should have nothing to do with social spending programs.  (For example, if Maine wanted to institute government health care, or a socialistic tax policy, that’s their decision.  But the Federal government can’t do it without amending its founding contract with the States.)

3.  The Supreme Court has not been vigilant in fulfilling its Constitutional role either, allowing such legislation to pass in the past, and probably allowing it through in the future. 

4.  America was founded on a simple principle: limited, accountable government.  Electing leaders who wish to expand the government’s role without being accountable to the Constitutional process would be a grave mistake.

As one familiar with Constitutional law, Senator Obama should echoing these sentiments, urging that his brand of “change” pass through the legislative channels required by our founding documents.  However, he is well aware that the States won’t ratify any such amendment, and thus seeks to bring socialism to our shores by ignoring the Constitution and packing the courts with those who will do the same.

His failure to uphold the Constitution should disqualify him from the Presidency, and should alarm every freedom-loving citizen, Republican or Democrat.

**************

Evidence: In this previous eRev post, I show how Senator Obama wishes to levy taxes on Americans to enforce “fairness,” not because it would help the government fulfill its legitimate Constitutional functions.

 

Also see:

No to Obama: Reason 2: He will expose the United States to unnecessary military risk.

No to Obama: Reason 1:  He lacks moral convictions on the issue that matters most: human rights.

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Why "No" Obama? Here's a good reason...

He will expose the United States to unnecessary military risk.

Obama has promised to “slow the development of future combat systems” and to make “deep cuts” in our nuclear arsenal. Consider:

-America’s known enemies are actively increasing their military power.

- the U.S.military is the one force on earth that can stand against radical Islamic facism and resurgent, militant Communism.

- there are growing threats from unexpected places, like Russia and Venezuela.

-U.S.military strength, specifically our nuclear arsenal, is the only reason our nation is not attacked by vicious enemies who seek (and even pray) for our destruction.  Staying ahead of these enemies in military strength and technology is critical to our children's future.

The United States has nothing to gain and everything to lose from the “deep cuts” Obama proposes. His idea that a weakened military makes us somehow morally stronger is not only absurd, but downright frightening. Peace is always made possible by strength, not just “strong words.”

This leads us to some important questions:

>“Future combat systems” would undoubtedly save American lives (especially our troops) during a time of war. Why would Obama want to slow such development down?

> Is not the prevention of war, along with the speedy and decisive execution of needed war, the most important investment our government can make, and a primary purpose for which the government exists? [“Provide for the common defense”] 

> If budget-cutting is really important, how about looking to less-critical areas of government spending first?

> What candidate is Iran, Russia, Syria and al-Qaeda rooting for right now, based on what you know from their policy positions?  (If you aren't sure, just watch the video below.)

We need a leader who understands that foreign policy can’t be dictated by lawyers; that international leadership isn’t settled at a banquet, but on the battlefield.

Obama is not that leader. In his own words:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRGru2CPC4E


Also see:

Another reason to consider  - His lack of moral convictions regarding human rights.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Get Encouraged about America

Check in at www.eRevolution.us for political analysis, inspiring American ideals, and just a little bit of humor.
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »