1. Obama wants to “fundamentally transform” America:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvJJP9AYgqU

 2. Obama says knowing when human life begins is “above my pay grade”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOTfnz11kBk

 3. Obama supported infanticide, voting against the Born Alive Infants Protection Act (and tried to cover up his votes):  http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/WhitePaperAugust282008.html

 4. Obama thinks having a baby is punishment:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nNbaig-D5pk

 5. Obama supports gay marriage and repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and is against Defense of Marriage Act:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jQJuKI0Gf8&feature=fvwrel (For the facts about homosexuality see http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and-the-culture/gay-rights.)

 6. Obama thinks Americans are bitter by clinging to guns and religion: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2h13OZHdmc

 7. Obama ridicules the Bible and exposes his utter ignorance: http://antiobamassiah.wordpress.com/video-of-obama-comments-about-the-bible-that-are-unbelievable/

 8. Obama bows and apologizes to foreign leaders, even our mortal enemies: http://www.capveterans.com/america_s_freedom_tea_parties_are_growing/id33.html, http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xWmsoAP-HoE#!

 9. Obama sends bust of Churchill home, insulting America’s strongest ally: http://thewesternexperience.com/2009/02/23/president-obama-returns-bust-of-sir-winston-churchill-back-to-britain/

 10. Obama wants to punish success and spread the wealth around. (Is the top 10% of earners paying 71% of the taxes–and 49% of Americans paying no federal income tax not enough socialism for you, Mr. President?): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoqI5PSRcXM

11. Obama snubs Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, our strongest ally in the middle east: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/03/25/president-allegedly-dumps-israeli-prime-minister-dinner/

 12. Obama says Israel should return to its 1967 border. (Does he think we should give Texas back to Mexico too?): http://matzav.com/obama-calls-for-israel-palestine-talks-on-1967-borders

 13. Obama scolds Supreme Court Justices at State of the Union Address while lying: http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/0110/Justice_Alitos_You_lie_moment.html

 14. Obama takes personal credit for killing Osama bin Laden (compare to George W Bush’s comments after capturing Saddam Hussein): http://savingcommonsense.blogspot.com/2011/05/contrasting-speeches-of-bush-on-saddam.html

 15. Obama wants electricity rates to “skyrocket”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlTxGHn4sH4

 16. Obama only talks to war commander once in 10 weeks. (How bizarre is it for the Commander-in-Chief not to communicate with his general during war time?): http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/09/gibbs-explains-why-the-president-has-only-talked-to-general-mcchrystal-once-in-10-weeks.html

 17. Obama violates the War Powers Act. (Is he above the law?):
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/16/us/politics/16powers.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

 18. Obama wants to bypass Congress on the debt ceiling. (Does he think he is king?):  http://www.cbsnews.com/8601-18563_162-20076575-6.html?assetTypeId=30&blogId=

 19. Obama wants U.S. to submit our laws to the world court: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=116552

 20. Obama releases a birth certificate that is most likely a fake: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY&feature=youtu.be

21. Obama is a serial liar:  http://www.google.com/search?q=obama+serial+liar&rls=com.microsoft:en-us:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GZHY_en

22. Obama lost over six billion dollars of our money on various solar scams, which its own administration admits were awarded without adequate due diligence, and which were a probable result of cronyism:

http://conservativeamericaonline.blogspot.com/2012/01/solyndra-is-just-tip-of-iceberg.html,

http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2011/09/14/breaking-white-house-pressured-omb-to-approve-solyndra-loan-before-due-diligence-complete/,

http://tucsoncitizen.com/compoundcaptive/2011/10/22/solar-scam-on-taxpayers-and-the-rich-get-richer/,

 http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/letters/wasting_green_on_greenies_no_more_Ty6EyjqLhb0hAHKgpRcR3L

23. Obama’s stimulus cost $278,000 per job: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-s-economists-stimulus-has-cost-278000-job_576014.html

24. Obama has blatantly ingnored the Constitution in at least 7 instances: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Perspectives/Default.aspx?id=1437376

25. Obama was absent from the Supercommittee deliberations. This absence was unbelievable to me. Here was the chance to get something done on the deficit, and Obama was bouncing around the world condemning America. Just imagine how an strong leader in the White House would be engaged in that process. http://www.northstarwriters.com/2011/11/13/lack-of-obama-leadership-leads-to-supercommittee-failure/

26. Obama says he is the fourth best president in history (better than Washington, better than Jefferson, etc). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxvSjDkF7HE

27. Obama had close associations with outspoken hater of America Jeremiah Wright and an unrepentenat terrorist Bill Ayers. (No white Republican candidate would have gotten away with that!) http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/08/obama_the_affirmative_action_president.html

28. Obama signs National Defense Authorization Act which includes a new legal system in which citizen suspects could be imprisoned without trial indefinitely. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization_Act_for_Fiscal_Year_2012, http://tenthamendmentcenter.com/2012/01/04/ndaa-open-season-for-the-police-state/

29. Obama stops the Keystone pipeline and our offshore drilling but is party to allowing (through the Ex-Im Bank) subsidies to the Brazilian oil company and its offshore drilling, perhaps because his liberal pal George Soros owns shares. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=xWmsoAP-HoE#!, http://www.politisite.com/2010/06/21/soros-invested-in-petrobras-days-before-obama-invested-billions-special-prosecutor-needed/

30. The U.S. capital Christmas tree pays homage to Obama but not Jesus. http://cnsnews.com/news/article/us-capitol-christmas-tree-pays-homage-obama-not-jesus

31. During the Chrysler bankruptcy, Obama violated the Fifth Amendment and more than 150 years of bankruptcy law by illegally treating secured creditors worse than unsecured creditors. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=32074

32. While running for President, Obama had promised that he would not have any lobbyists working in his administration. However, by February 2010, he had more than 40 lobbyists working in his administration. http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/obama-makes-mockery-his-own-lobbyist-ban

33. In 2011, after Boeing had hired 1,000 new employees to work at its new factory in South Carolina, the Obama administration ordered Boeing to shut down the factory, because the factory was non-union. (Can a president really tell a company where to put a factory!?)  http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/business/21boeing.html?_r=3

34. The Obama administration pressured Ford to pull adds that told the truth about bailout money for General Motors and Chrysler. http://nation.foxnews.com/obama-administration/2011/09/27/wh-pressures-ford-pull-bailout-ad

35. The Obama administration used racially motivated actions to withdraw the case against Black Panthers who were intimidating voters. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/07/us/07rights.html

36. Obama outrageously ramped up the bureacracy by appointing numerous Czars, probably in opposition to the Consitution which gives the Senate right of approval for such posts. http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/59071-feingold-questions-obama-czars

37. Obama wants to rid the U.S. of private health insurance. http://www.breitbart.tv/uncovered-video-obama-explains-how-his-health-care-plan-will-eliminate-private-insurance/

38. The Obama administration gives over 1300 waivers to his own health care law. http://www.breitbart.tv/uncovered-video-obama-explains-how-his-health-care-plan-will-eliminate-private-insurance/

39. Obama puts self-described communists in his administration (including Van Jones, Anita Dunn, and others). http://www.breitbart.tv/uncovered-video-obama-explains-how-his-health-care-plan-will-eliminate-private-insurance/, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2FVEe7wCzs

40. Obama reneged on promises to be the most transparent administration and not to hire lobbyists. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/25/us/politics/25caribou.html, http://www.breitbart.tv/white-house-reporters-grill-gibbs-over-selected-questions-for-obama/,  http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=11449, http://old.news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090128/pl_politico/18128

41. Obama defends public schools and the teachers unions but sends his own kids to private schools while eliminating vouchers for kids who cannot afford private schools. http://theweek.com/article/index/207598/should-obama-send-his-kids-to-public-school, http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=31163

42. Obama promises to cut the deficit but is on track to add as much debt as all presidents combined from Washington to Clinton. http://www.google.com/search?q=obama+deficits&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=A1b&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=imvnsu&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=8OoET9TNFKz_sQLao6iRCg&ved=0CDMQsAQ&biw=1122&bih=837

43. Obama regime calls Fort Hood shooting “work place violence.” (How about “terrorism?”) http://nation.foxnews.com/ft-hood-shooting/2011/12/07/obama-regime-calls-ft-hood-shooting-workplace-violence

44. Obama is the first president to preside over a credit rating downgrade of U.S. debt. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/sandp-considering-first-downgrade-of-us-credit-rating/2011/08/05/gIQAqKeIxI_story.html

45. Obama’s Justice Department sells murder weapons to Mexican drug cartels who in turn aid Hezbollah terrorists. http://capoliticalnews.com/2011/12/14/obama-fast-and-furious-helps-mexican-drug-cartel-give-to-hezbollah-terrorists/

46. Obama makes still another unlawful power grab by issuing “recess appointment” while the Senate is still in session (This was against the advice of his own Justice Department and was probably an impeachable offense). http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/with-cordray-appointment-obama-to-set-precedent/2012/01/04/gIQAJvMYaP_blog.html

47. Obama is the first  President to force people to buy a product they may not want from a third party. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/with-cordray-appointment-obama-to-set-precedent/2012/01/04/gIQAJvMYaP_blog.html

48. Obama spends a trillion dollars on “shovel ready jobs” and later admits that they were not shovel ready. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/with-cordray-appointment-obama-to-set-precedent/2012/01/04/gIQAJvMYaP_blog.html

49. Obama administration illegally extends defacto amnesty to illegal immigrants (DREAM Act) by executive fiat. http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/obama-administration-implements-dream-act-through-executive-fiat/

50. Obama refuses to honor subpoena from Congressional Oversight Subcomittee. http://energycommerce.house.gov/News/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=8814

51. Obama administration sues states (AZ, AL) over their attempt to enforce immigration laws the federal government is supposed to enforce but refuses to do so. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-administration-widens-challenges-to-state-immigration-laws/2011/09/28/gIQA8HgR7K_story.html

52. Obama fires inspector general of AmeriCorps for investigating a corrupt crony. http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-administration-widens-challenges-to-state-immigration-laws/2011/09/28/gIQA8HgR7K_story.html

53. Obama is first President to golf 90 times times in first 3 years in office (while America struggles domestically and internationally). http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-administration-widens-challenges-to-state-immigration-laws/2011/09/28/gIQA8HgR7K_story.html

54. Obama admits that he is lazy. http://www.examiner.com/conservative-in-national/president-obama-admits-he-s-lazy

55. Obama threatens insurance companies as his contempt for free markets is matched only by his contempt for the First Amendment. http://www.fitsnews.com/2010/09/10/obama-threatens-providers/

56. Under Obama’s leadership America reached the unthinkable milestone of our debt being higher than our GDP. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/08/04/us-debt-reaches-100-percent-countrys-gdp/

57. Obama  preaches class warfare to the 99% but meets the next day with his 1% followers for money. http://weaselzippers.us/2011/12/07/yesterday-obama-preaches-class-warfare-to-the-99-today-meets-with-his-1-backers-at-38500-per-person-fundraiser/

58. Obama is incredibly hypocritical. Just one example: He called a much smaller Bush Debt Rise “unpatriotic.” http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/01/13/obama-called-smaller-bush-debt-rise-unpatriotic/

59. Obama wants Internet ID for all Americans. (Where does this man draw the line with his thirst for power and intrusion into our livest?) http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/01/08/report-obama-administration-plans-create-internet-id-americans/

60. Obama thinks the Supreme Court has failed to bring ”Redistributive Change.” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNJsTjblC-Y

61. Obama cancels the National Day of Prayer but prays to Allah in the White House. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=errwiYlXw-g&feature=related

62. Obama recites the Islamic call to prayeer in perfect Arabic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuXxtg4M_z8&feature=related

63. Obama’s Cash-for-Clunkers program cost taxpayers $24,000 per car. (No kidding.) http://www.thenewamerican.com/economy/sectors-mainmenu-46/2210-did-cash-for-clunkers-cost-taxpayers-24000-per-car-sold

64. Obama says that successful people did not do it on their own (finding yet another way to knock success.) http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2838801/posts

65. Obama-backed electric car battery company files for bankruptcy (proving Solyndra was not a fluke) http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/206777-doe-backed-battery-company-files-for-bankruptcy

66. 36 Obama aids owe $833,000 in back taxes http://news.investors.com/Article/599002/201201260818/obama-white-house-staff-back-taxes.htm

67. Obama requires religious employers to cover cost of contraception (furious yet?) http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-admin-mandates-religious-employers-cover-contraception-cost-catholic-bishops-furious/

68. His middle name is HUSSEIN.

Our thanks to Squirrel Hill’s Blog and also Director Blue Blog for some of these:

• http://danfromsquirrelhill.wordpress.com/2011/12/11/35-reasons-why-no-decent-human-being-should-vote-to-reelect-president-obama/
• http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2011/06/president-barack-obamas-complete-list.html

I recently told a friend that I might hold my nose and vote for Ron Paul because he is the only one talking about drastically cutting the federal bureaucracy. I take it all back! The more we learn about this guy, the more troubling are his views.

We argued in our series that libertarianism is based on a moral foundation of sand. And that is exactly what Paul’s views reflect. On the surface, conservatives ought to like him. He says he is for the Constitution and for smaller government. But let’s see where this leads us.

He says he is against the federal government making laws on morality. But this is a sham. Every law reflects somebody’s ideas of right and wrong, and thus all laws are in some sense moral statements. For example, Paul says that the abortion question should be left to the states because there is no authority for a pro-life law in the Constitution. Would he vote for a law in his own state of Texas that outlaws abortion? We doubt it, if his libertarian views are consistent. He claims to be pro-life, but on what moral basis does he say that and to what extent should it be fixed into law? Should murder not be a federal offense?

Ron Paul also has stated that there should be no “age of consent law” in the federal statutes. In other words, Paul says that it should be OK by federal law for a 24 year old man to convince a 10 year old girl to have sex. When pressed on this issue and other similar issues, Paul says that the states should have no such laws either!

We presume that Paul thinks that the federal government should not have outlawed polygamy. This would be consistent with his libertarian views. Would he vote for a state law against polygamy? (Any such laws for a libertarian would be completely arbitrary.)

What about slavery? Should that be a state-only issue too?

Here are some other things about Ron Paul:

• He left the Republican Party to run as a Libertarian in the 1980’s because he did not like Ronald Reagan.
• He was the only member of the House of Representatives to vote against a 2005 resolution condemning Ahmadinejad’s call to “wipe Israel off the map” and a 2009 resolution “expressing support” for Iranian pro-democracy demonstrators.
• He has intimated, on more than one occasion, that the United States is to blame for the 9/11 massacre.
• In the 1990’s he wrote a newsletter that had multiple vividly racist statements, a fact for which he acknowledges he holds “some” responsibility. (Some responsibility? These letters came out under his signature.) Apparently the American Nazi party supported Ron Paul.
• He has said that the United States had no business being in World War II.
• He is an active pork obtainer and sees this as consistent with his other views.
• He is for legalizing all drugs.
• He is weak on traditional marriage, and even though a professing Christian he is unwilling to acknowledge homosexuality as a sin.

Folks, this guy is NUTTY, and a very dangerous man. It is pretty hard to tell many of his ideas from liberals like Michael Moore! I have been listening to various talk shows lately. The Paulites are calling in droves to support this nut. It is amazing how blinded they are to the facts when presented to them.

Here is a link to our article on libertarianism (or just scroll down): http://offgridblogger.wordpress.com/2011/02/07/a-critical-review-of-libertarianism/.

Libertarianism is essentially a non-religious political philosophy. But Christians and libertarians are often allies in the public square. American political conservatism has always been a marriage between the very religious and the less religious. For example, among the Founding Fathers, Patrick Henry and Sam Adams were what we would call today evangelical Christians. On the other hand, Thomas Paine was a deist.

Deism is a marginalized philosophy today for good reason. I have never even spoken with a person either personally or through our Faith Facts website who called himself a deist. But libertarianism, which has some similarities, is on the rise. We will explore what this movement is all about. We will see how this philosophy differs from both biblical Christianity, from liberalism, and from our Founding Fathers’ ideas on government.

The primary problem with libertarianism is that it attempts to define morality without God. But as Dostoevsky said, “If there is no God, everything is permitted.” While libertarians will resist this conclusion, in the end, a moral system or political system without God is arbitrary, and ultimately whoever has the most political power defines what is moral. This is evident when we notice that some libertarians are pro-life and some are pro-abortion.

Libertarianism would probably not be the force that it is today without Ayn Rand. She is the queen of the movement. While many libertarians are merely agnostics, she was an atheist. She attempted to define a moral system without God by a philosophy that she called Objectivism. If you have time, look over this article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Objectivism_(Ayn_Rand)

Does this make sense to you? You be the judge. But as I read this I remembered reading L. Ron Hubbard’s book Scientology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientology) and thinking, “This is pure nonsense.” While there are definitely differences between Scientology and Objectivism, the question that both must face is:

“Says who?”

Aren’t Rand’s arguments arbitrary? Feel free to disagree.

One thing—among several things—that Rand completely failed to comprehend is that Christianity is not arbitrary. Our religion website  explains how Christianity is grounded in reason and evidence: http://www.faithfacts.org/.

According to the Wikipedia article on Objectivism, Rand wanted to call her philosophy Existentialism, but the term had already been coined. But there are clear similarities to Existentialism and Objectivism. If you ever took a philosophy class you may remember that Existentialism is a philosophy that was a reaction to Christianity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism).

Existentialism has largely been discredited, I think, because of its important association with nihilism—the absence of meaning and ultimately despair. Without God, it is argued, there can be no objective meaning in life.

So the problem with Objectivism, Existentialism, and Libertarianism (and any non-theistic worldview) is that they bump into the philosophical problem that—“We come from nowhere, we go to nowhere, but somehow life is filled with meaning in between.”

We cannot miss the similarities between libertarianism and liberalism.  It is not accidental that they have the same root word. Both often have certain political goals in common, such as anti-war sentiments and pro gay rights. Something else in common is that both systems are at war with God—as are communism, humanism, and other non-theistic worldviews.

Even some Christians claim to be libertarians without understanding its non-theistic roots. Yes, there are different versions of libertarianism and not all are purely non-theistic. But we argue that any moral attributes that are found in libertarianism are borrowed from Christianity. Remember: history teaches that tyranny begins with eliminating God.

A reader sent me a video explaining libertarianism. You might want to watch at least part of this:

www.isil.org/resources/introduction.swf

Notice that this philosophy is centered on the self. That is to say, it is a selfish philosophy. The only difference between this and liberalism is that libertarians openly admit this selfishness. Liberals do not; they pretend to be compassionate.

This philosophy of self above all else is distinctly different from biblical Christianity. Christianity subjugates the self to God and other people (Matthew 22:34-39). In contrast, libertarians and liberals alike are opposed to a moral authority above themselves.

Just pay attention to what libertarians say. For example, a famous libertarian on Fox News is Judge Andrew Napolitano. When he explains our rights he does so by saying that our rights are “part of our humanity.” With this explanation, he ignores the most important part of what the Declaration of Independence actually says—that our rights are a gift from God.

Not unlike Napolitano, liberal President Obama often leaves God out of his talks. See:

http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2010/11/30/obamas_7_creator_omissions_part_1

and

http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2010/12/07/obamas_7_creator_omissions_part_2/page/full/.  

As Pilate and Herod were allies (Luke 23:12), we should be wary of this coziness, or at least the similarities between libertarianism and liberalism.

But as Matt Lewis points out, there are differences between libertarianism and liberalism (see links below). For liberals, equality is the highest good. For liberatarians, liberty is the highest good. But both equality and liberty can have disastrous results.

As Lewis further points out, the moral order that results from Christianity-based classical conservatism is crucial to society. Or as John Adams insisted, “Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people.” Certainly Adams had in mind Christianity. (See the Bible and Government article at our religion website link at the bottom of this article.)

A charge that libertarians and liberals alike make against Christians is that applying the Bible to government leads to theocracy. But we can see that radical libertarianism can lead to its own theocracy, as Gary DeMar points out:

http://americanvision.org/1467/theocracy-inescapable-concept/.   

And we note that anarchism is a branch of libertarianism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarianism). It can be argued that anarchism is libertarianism taken to its logical conclusion. So on the one hand, libertarianism can lead to theocracy, or it can lead to anarchism. It can lead to liberal tyranny—or it can lead to lawlessness.

Our message to libertarians is this—if what you desire is freedom, consider biblical Christianity. With history as our witness, the more Christianity, the more freedom.

For more study on libertarianism, please see these excellent articles by Selwyn Duke:

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/10/libertarianisms_folly_when_liv.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/10/what_libertarians_misunderstan.html

http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/10/yes_folks_we_all_would_legisla.html

These by Matt Lewis:

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/02/16/the-case-for-conservatism-versus-libertarianism/

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2011/02/20/on-conservative-movement-libertarians-and-neo-objectivists/

This article by Marvin Olasky:

http://www.worldmag.com/articles/18283

This article by Thomas E. Woods about the history of natural rights:

http://books.google.com/books?id=zVDR2ZePzvUC&pg=PA187&lpg=PA187&dq=secular+residue+of+religious+attitudes+and+assumptions+which+historically+found+expression+first+in+the+liturgy+and+rituals+and+doctrine+of+the+church+and+therafter+in+the+institutions+and+concepts+and+values+of+the+law.+When+these+historical+roots+are+not+understood,+many+parts+of+the+law+appear+to+lack+any+underlying+source+of+validity.&source=bl&ots=JeLekKpUfO&sig=m_ZxvgKsc5pTuemBlfK9ttuLqzg&hl=en&ei=KsZbTcfYHsGUtweZkeC_Cw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=5&ved=0CCwQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q&f=false

And this summary from our religion site about the Bible and government:

http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and-the-culture/the-bible-and-government

First, the conservative approach. Below is a 3-part video series about the intellectual basis of conservatism. While more can be said, it is a super introduction. It shows how conservatives use reason and evidence to defend their ideas. Each video is about 10 minutes long. Yes, it’s a long time to invest! But if you are serious about studying this stuff, the series is outstanding:

Part 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLD6VChcWCE

Part 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0MESB6VZM4&feature=related

Part 3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KkXI-MNSb8Q&feature=related

Next, the liberal approach. Here are are 2 videos. The first one is about 4 minutes long. It shows how the left is using law to try to shut up conservatives (hate crimes, net neutrality, fairness doctrine, etc.):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWHgUE9AD4s

And here is the second,  in animation. It shows how leftists use ad hominem attacks (name calling), and how they ignore the evidence, and they avoid the issues. It is about 7 minutes long:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGwtG8nVpUU

These approaches by liberals should be terrifying to any thinking person. This is exactly how every totalitarian despot gets control of people.

Of course, conservatives are also occasionally guilty of name-calling. But with the left, it is a way of life. The latest such attack by the left is to call tea-partiers racist. In reality, it is the liberals who are inherently racist. This is because liberals divide people into groups: rich-poor, black-white, women-men, etc. Conservatives see people as individuals. Christian conservatives (the ones who take the Bible seriously) especially see every person as being made in the image of God, which is a biblical concept. So every life has true and unique value. As the Declaration of Independence states, ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL, ENDOWED BY THEIR CREATOR WITH CERTAIN UNALIENABLE RIGHTS. This is a conservative statement, taken from a Christian worldview.

So, there you have a 41 minute course on politics and worldviews. You spend a lot of wasted time watching TV. Why not take a little of that TV time and learn something important? Watch the videos. Then pay attention to these concepts when you hear each side in public debate.

And why not send a link to this series to your liberal friends. You might say something like, “Hey, Joe. We have had some discussions about political philosophy in the past. Here is a link to some thoughts about how each side argues its case. I would be interested in your thoughts on this video series.”

“This book has meticulously documented Obama’s efforts to systematically undermine America’s founding principles and its heritage of liberty in his quest to transform our economy and very form of government. The facts speak for themselves, as does Obama’s destructive record.

For all the posturing about bipartisanship and his openness to all ideas, this book has shown just how partisan, close minded, and determined he is to implement his agenda at any cost. And it has detailed the deplorably corrupt and high-handed tactics he has used in the process.

Obama doesn’t listen to the people; he brazenly ignores our wishes, indeed our pleas, that he cease and desist from his reckless course. But far from showing the normal concern a politician—even a statesman—would have toward his own rising unpopularity, Obama moves forward at double-time pace, never looking back and never revealing the slightest inkling of self-doubt—an alleged trait of George W. Bush that earned him the Left’s everlasting contempt.

In his monomania for socialism, Obama will brook no challenge. In response to the miserable results of his economic charlatanism, he maintains things would have been much worse without his initiatives. And after he failed to keep his grandiose promises to improve American diplomacy, he gave us more of the same: weak-kneed engagement and Chamberlainesque appeasement. In the meantime he continues to insult and sell out our allies and coddle our enemies, as Iran races unimpeded to cross the nuclear threshold.

Does it worry him that America is in decline under his leadership? Obviously not, as he voices contempt for American exceptionalism and pledges to rectify our allegedly unfair consumption of the world’s resources. In fact, one can’t help but notice that a declining America actually meshes with his ideology quite well.

His colossally wasteful stimulus and mortgage bailout packages, along with his foisting nationalized healthcare on this nation, are just the beginning. He is hell-bent on passing a cap and trade bill that will further destroy our prospect for economic recovery and future growth. His plan to boost taxes, including a possible VAT, is also on the front burner, and we shouldn’t be surprised if he ultimately tries to enact a wealth tax whereby he taxes not just our income and sales transactions, but our constitutionally protected private property. Many reasonably fear their pension funds are vulnerable and ripe for the taking. If that happens, you can be sure the debt-exploding Obama will insist he’s doing us a favor by confiscating our life’s earnings to rectify the debt crisis for which he himself is largely responsible. Small businesses and producers everywhere wait in anxiety for the next series of shoes to drop from the socialist centipede of Obama’s agenda.

If all this weren’t bad enough, his ‘urgent’ push for comprehensive immigration reform has just gotten underway. Expect this initiative to be loaded with more than the normal amount of demagoguery and populism, as this supposedly post-racial president plays the race card on steroids en route to decimating the rule of law and what remains of America’s unique culture. 

Some maintain Obama is intentionally wreaking havoc on America as part of a Cloward-Piven or Alinskyite strategy to manufacture a crisis in order to destroy the nation as we know it and rebuild it in a socialist image. Others argue Obama just believes so deeply in socialist dogma that he is impervious to the manifest evidence of its failure. Regardless of which scenario may be correct, the outcome would be the same.

Americans, even former skeptics on the right side of the aisle, should now understand how committed Obama is to his far-left agenda. They should finally grasp how far the Left is willing to go when they’re in power. Their talk of moving past divisive partisanship is a veneer designed to cover their radical designs. They are precisely the opposite of what they hold themselves out to be: freedom loving, compassionate, pro-economic growth, bullish on America, democratic, tolerant, and compromising. 

America is in a dangerously rapid nosedive under Obama’s navigation. The key to our delivery from this systematic assault is for the American people to understand Obama’s extremist agenda, to get engaged, and to do everything we can to peaceably remove him and his supporters from office at election time and replace them with constitution-revering, liberty-loving public servants who respect the rule of law.”

1. Immediately freeze defense spending at 2009 levels until the budget is balanced.

2. Repeal Obama’s health care legislation.

3. Cut the budget at the Department of Education by 5% every year until the Department is dissolved in 20 years. 

4. Immediately freeze all other federal spending except Social Security and Medicare at 2005 levels.

5. Immediately begin to scale back Social Security and Medicare with the long term goal of eliminating these programs. Specifically, cut back the total spending on these programs 1% per year every year. In 25 years we would have them down to 75% of current levels—a manageable number. In 100 years they would be gone. The private market will gradually pick up the slack and eventually replace these public programs.

In addition, we would begin the constitutional amendment process for 3 new amendments:

1. Limit total federal government spending to 20% of the previous year’s GDP (or a five-year average), to be effective 5 years after passage. Year-to-year exceptions would be allowed in national emergencies including a declared war, but only by a two-thirds majority vote of both houses of Congress. See http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/mar/08/stop-the-orgy-in-congress/.

2.  Allow all federal judges to be removed from office by a 60% vote of the people. All federal judges would appear on the ballot at each presidential election.

3. Require a detail of every proposed law and every detail of the federal budget to be posted online. This would include the salary of every federal employee.

If this notion is foreign to you, please bear with us. Consider logically your predispositions and examine the facts as we go through the arguments.

First, let’s define our terms. Socialism is government mandated activities or government control of assets. Marxism is using the power of the state to take money from some groups of citizens and give it to other groups (“redistribution of wealth” or “social justice”). Liberalism is a broader term that encompasses both of the above. Progressivism and statism are synonyms for liberalism. Because there is so much overlap, we will use these terms more-or-less interchangeably.

TEN REASONS WHY LIBERALISM IS NOT ONLY INEFFECTIVE BUT INDEED IMMORAL AND INHUMANE:

1. Redistribution of wealth is not JUSTICE, it is THEFT. Contrary to liberal thought, forced redistribution of wealth is immoral. God did not give the Ten Commandments to Moses that read, “Thou shall not steal unless Congress passes a different law.” True compassion is voluntary—from the heart—and for the recipient it is challenging, personal, and spiritual. In other words, the down-and-out need more than money; they need encouragement and spiritual food. Government offers none of these criteria. Whenever wealth is redistributed, an injustice is done to at least one party. While government may legitimately encourage voluntary giving—and encourage institutions that facilitate it such as Christian organizations—it has no moral authority to force people to give by the heavy hand of the state. (Helpful book: The Tragedy of American Compassion by Marvin Olasky.)

2. Socialism and marxism reduce our freedoms, thus leading to tyranny. Freedom, we argue, is a legitimate moral end in itself—an unalienable right. Remember the Declaration of Independence: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. This is the foundational principle of America’s Founders. It is no less true today than in 1776. (Helpful book: Liberty and Tyranny by Mark Levin.)

3. When government redistributes wealth it even hurts the people it is trying to help! This is not necessarily intuitive, but observable. The welfare mess is a classic example of failed government intervention.  We have 50 years of experience which prove that oppressive utopian ideas of “compassion” only imprison the welfare class into perpetual poverty. An interesting current comparison is Texas vs. California. Texas has a conservative philosophy of government while California has taken the liberal utopian route. Texas, as of October 2009, had an 8.3% unemployment rate, while California’s unemployment rate was 12.9%—55% higher than Texas. Who is doing a better job for its citizens, including for the working class? (A book that is crucial to understanding the problem is Uncle Sam’s Plantation by black author Star Parker.) Watch this fascinating short clip of Milton Friedman on the Phil Donahue show: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A.

4. Every time the government gets involved in something, in the long run it hurts the economy. Remember that the government does not produce anything. So every dollar taken out of the productive economy (or distorts the productive economy) reduces the total output of the economy. Interference in the economy either by direct action or through regulations ends up decreasing the wealth of the country rather than increasing it. Regulations add to the cost of production, lessening efficiency and raising prices—which in turn lowers demand. When this occurs, those at every income level suffer. Further, armed with the power to tax, government fosters stupid economic decisions because it is blinded without a profit motive. A recent example is how the federal government—through both legislation and Federal Reserve policy—encouraged banks to make home loans to people who could not afford them, precipitating the housing collapse. One must be blinded by pre-conceptions to fail to see that any intrusions into the economy with Soviet-like utopian ideologies are ultimately disastrous to its people. The more utopian liberalism is introduced into the system, the poorer it performs. (Important books: How Capitalism Saved America by Thomas DiLorenzo and How Capitalism Will Save Us by Steve Forbes. Also, watch this short video about how the government worsened the Depression: http://dittosrush.blogspot.com/2009/11/thomas-sowell-explains-great-depression.html).

5. Socialism reduces the incentive to innovate and produce. If we are interested in increasing philanthropy and compassionate giving, we should grow the economy as much as possible so that philanthropy is possible.Capitalism is attacked by liberals as not compassionate. Liberals have this misplaced notion that profit is immoral. The voluntary exchange of goods and services for profit is not immoral. The fact is, the profit motive is the engine that grows the economy and has produced every modern convenience. Just take a moment to think through the things in your life and ask yourself why they are there. From the food you eat to the products you use, there has been an enormous amount of entrepreneurial energy and innovation that has made these things available to you. Government, on the other hand, not only does not produce anything, it creates shortages. Milton Friedman said, “If the Government was in charge of the Sahara Desert, there would be a shortage of sand.” An example in the real economy would be government health care. It is a certainty that the currently proposed government takeover of medicine will lead to fewer doctors. In one study, 45% of doctors would consider quitting if Congress passes health care overhaul. Bright students, faced with huge costs to attend medical school, will choose other fields. Such is a logical outcome from absurd policies. If we cover more people, we would need more doctors, more nurses, more hospitals, and more clinics. Promises of universal coverage cannot overcome the reality of universal shortages—leading to poorer service and rationing. Liberalism breeds an attitude of entitlement among the slothful. But socialism actually reduces incentives for productive activity of both the classes from whom the money is taken and to whom the money is given. If a father continually takes money from a successful son and gives it to a slothful son, eventually both sons will become less productive and tainted.

6. Studies show that government is much less efficient at the same tasks as private enterprise or charity. At least one study (http://www.gerrycharlottephelps.com/2009/08/fed-govt-wastes-more-money-than-business-charity.html) showed that Government administrative costs consume 35-55% of the total expenditures. So in the health care debate, for example, if insurance companies make a 3-7% profit on sales, they are still hugely more efficient at delivering health care services than government. And unlike the profit made by private concerns, that 35-55% loss by government benefits nobody—it is essentially lost (wasted). Is there not yet enough outrage at story after story of pork barrel spending in Congress? How numbed does one have to be to fail to see that government by its very nature not only wastes money but is bent to cronyism and fraud? Of course, man’s inherent sinfulness can show up in any organization. But the government has never run an efficient system of any kind anywhere, with the possible exception of the military.

7. Socialism rewards failure.  Consider the takeover of General Motors. There have been hundreds of automobile companies that have failed in our history. Every once in awhile, the free enterprise system purges itself of the losers, only to be replaced by more efficient producers that have a better model how to deliver more goods and services that consumers want to buy at a price they can afford. It is suicidal for society to resist this trend. A key tenet of investing is to cut your losses and reinvest in more promising things. In an investment portfolio, nursing your losers leads to a stagnant portfolio of trash. One may think, at first glance, that it is compassionate to save jobs by government interference. But in the long run, the economy is held back by government interference, hurting everyone. Check out this article which explains how even our prized anti-trust laws and the progressive income tax tend to reward the inefficient producers and slow growth: http://mises.org/daily/3856.

8. Socialism and marxism ultimately lead to financial destruction. The U. S. budget death spiral in which we now find ourselves places us at a very serious risk of economic collapse. See our blog entry below entitled “U. S. Budget Death Spiral.” As Margaret Thatcher said, “Socialism works until you run out of other people’s money.” Let’s just consider the centerpiece of the liberal socialist agenda—Social Security. It is a madoff/ponzi scheme. It taxes workers to pay for those retired. There is no actual “Social Security Trust Fund”—even though this term is still commonly used. The liabilities of the Social Security system are unfunded promises to pay retirees. Together with Medicare, these transfer payments are by far the largest item in the federal budget, and are the primary reason why the federal government is on the brink of bankruptcy. The Social Security tax burden hits the low income worker’s budget the hardest. And studies show that if workers were to put what they pay in taxes instead into a conservative personal investment account over their working lifetime, they would have substantially more income at retirement! And they would own the account and thus have something to pass on to their heirs. See http://www.socialsecurity.org/reformandyou/you.html.

9. Liberalism destroys the Rule of Law. America’s Constitution is quite clear that there are specific enumerated powers of the federal government, and all powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states (or to the people). Thus the states are free to have health care programs, the federal government is not. The liberal agenda in legislation and court rulings has openly ignored the Constitution. Considering federal health care legislation, there is absolutely no authority in the Constitution to force people to buy something they do not want—yet our legislators couldn’t care less. When the Rule of Law is destroyed, despotism takes over. The result is predictable: If history is any judge, in time the Constitution will completely crumble into shambles and the United States of America will dissolve. History proves that the yearning for freedom always pushes man to demand the freedom that he is convinced is a God-given right.

10. Liberalism not only breeds hatred but indeed contributes to people’s deaths. Because liberalism is a relativistic worldview, some people are ultimately expendable. We see this in every leftist government, but often fail to make the connection to this ideology at home. Liberals attack conservatives as being self-centered, money hungry, and uncompassionate. But who are more likely champions of the innocent unborn and the elderly? The current health care debate should heighten the awareness of who is concerned about the almighty dollar over human rights. It is the liberals who are willing to cut back on mammograms for middle-aged women to save a few dollars. It is the liberals who would cut Medicare to seniors to save money. It is liberals who want free abortions, taking the lives of millions of innocent unborn children. We ask: who are truly compassionate and who are the hypocrites? Further, liberalism pits one class of citizens against another. It especially fosters hatred, envy, and covetousness toward the successful rather than admiration and inspiration. Bitterness filters down in an organization too. I ask you to consider how you are treated by government employees such as those behind the counter at the Post Office or tax office compared to most for-profit business. In which setting are you more likely to get more personal warmth and upbeat, caring service? Ironically, socialism is inherently heartless, while capitalism is inherently caring for the customer. Remember that a business’s survival depends on the satisfied customer. Related to this in an important way, liberalism also often discourages faith in God or creates new gods suitable to a pre-conceived ideology. (Helpful book: Godless: The Church of Liberalism, by Ann Coulter.)

Objection Considered: The socialist may object to these arguments by saying, “But wait. People have rights.” For example, in the current health care debate, we hear that people have a right to health care. But this is incorrect. Health care is not a right. It is a good/service—like food, clothing, shelter, or insurance. And the way to distribute these things that is the least expensive to the consumer with the best quality is through private enterprise. The free exchange of goods and services is the most moral and the most effective means of distribution. America’s Declaration of Independence is an historic document that philosophically defines rights. Rights are God-given to personhood. They cannot be created by government. In particular, life is a right. A good or service is not a right.

Indeed, America’s Declaration of Independence explains that liberty—that is, freedom from government interference—is also a right. So liberals who say that something like government health care is a right in fact have it backwards. Government interference into health care tramples on liberty and thus tramples on our rights! It is an abrogation of our rights.

Summary: Conservatism is constructive. Liberalism is destructive. We are not arguing that government has no role to play in society. We are arguing that there are usually constitutional solutions in the free market that are much more effective while being morally upright.

For a discussion of how Christianity influences government and society, see our website: http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and-the-culture/the-bible-and-government and also http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and-the-culture/The-Impact-of-Christianity.

Here is a good link, The Answer to Socialism:  http://www.doczero.org/2010/02/the-answer-to-socialism/

Now, consider the US Debt Clock at this website:

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

And ponder the information in this article:

http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php/guestcommentaryview?art_id=10251

The article points out that the current nominal debt of the US Government is $11 trillion ($12 trillion as of November 2009). Divided by our population of 304 million, this works out to $38,000 per person. So a family of 4 is looking at $152,000 as their share of the debt. But that is just today. This is the tip of the iceberg for several reasons:

1.  The U.S.’s unfunded and off-balance sheet contingent liabilities stand at over $100 trillion depending on how you want to calculate them. The so-called unfunded liabilities include Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Fannie Mae debt, etc. Remember, Social Security and Medicare are madoff/ponzi schemes. That is, these programs are not funded. They rely on taxing current workers to pay the benefits of the elderly. The system was never designed to handle the now burgeoning retired population; indeed, it cannot handle it.

2.  The 2010 federal budget projections show 40% of the federal government’s expenditures coming from borrowed money! (Does this fry your hair?!) The Obama administration said in mid 2009 that we will add another $9 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years, bringing the nominal debt to a staggering $20 trillion. But according to www.whitehouse.gov, this figure by late 2009 was already out of date. It is now expected that we will add $12 trillion dollars in 10 years!

3.  But even these projections are themselves the tip of the iceberg. They are based on optimistic assumptions about an economic recovery. A “normal” economic recovery is unlikely (we argue impossible) given that consumer debt verses GDP is at an all time high.

Consumers have no more borrowing power to fuel the economy. We have mortgaged our future. We are up to our eyeballs in debt. What this means is that as consumers inevitably will go through an extended period of paying off debts over the next many years. Symptomatic of the problem is that as of November 2009, 23% of families who have a home mortgage are “underwater” on their mortgage—that is, they owe more on their home than the market value. This is an unprecedented problem for the economy. This situation alone is almost certain to make the economy very sluggish for the foreseeable future.

So the future budget deficits and thus debt projections are very likely understated, and perhaps understated by a large amount. But there is even more room for concern:

4.  The number of people in the United States who are 65 or older is expected to double by 2030, further taxing the welfare ponzi schemes.

5.  The interest on the debt ALONE may soon exceed our per capita income (http://www.scrivener.net/2009/08/six-ways-us-wont-escape-its-national.html).

6.  The nationalized health care proposals—which are likely to pass in some form—are not yet in the above projections. Every state that has tried such schemes (Maine, Massachusetts, Hawaii, Tennessee, and Oregon) has found that the costs are consistently enormously higher than projections. (“If you think health care is expensive now, just wait till it’s free.”) There are numerous articles on the internet that you can find about the disasters that socialized health care has produced in these states. The economics on the administration’s socialized medicine is pretty simple. They want to add 46 million people and add over 40 new government bureaucracies–and are telling us that it will save money. Well, where is this money supposed to come from? The truth is that socialized medicine will force much higher taxes and more debt (not to mention bring worse health care).

Can the USA actually go broke? Well, yes!!

Finally, Americans must consider the root causes for this problem. What is the morality of your economic views? Please consider these questions:

http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2009/08/24/what_is_the_foundation_of_your_economic_beliefs_97371.html

 Other good links:

Scary: http://trueslant.com/nancymiller/2009/09/20/debt-bears-say-grants-optimism-is-bull/ 

How much debt is too much: http://www.forbes.com/2009/09/10/national-debt-default-opinions-columnists-bruce-bartlett.html

Who is more efficient: http://www.gerrycharlottephelps.com/2009/08/fed-govt-wastes-more-money-than-business-charity.html

Crippling: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203585004574393110640864526.html

History: http://www.american.com/archive/2009/september/debt-be-not-proud-the-sorry-tale-of-america2019s-out-of-control-spending

Jobs: http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2009/09/14/saving_one_million_jobs_at_787000_per_job_97404.html

Cost of Cash for Clunkers: http://seekingalpha.com/article/152909-cash-for-clunkers-may-cost-up-to-45-354-per-vehicle and                                          http://blog.lib.umn.edu/levin031/transportationist/2009/09/cash_for_clunkers_cost_exceede.html

20 Questions about ObamaCare: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2350627/posts

Budget problem compared to past cycles: http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/53246

One plan to solve the problem: http://seekingalpha.com/article/175860-can-the-federal-budget-be-balanced?source=hp_wc

With evidence, logic, and references

the best summary of Obama’s politics on the web

By Charles Meek, Off-Grid Blogger

I was motivated to put this list together for a couple of reasons. First, I have heard some people say that they will vote for Barack Obama, but could not give any reasons why. But likewise, I have heard some people say they plan to vote against Obama, but again could not give any substantive reasons why. So I decided to put together solid information. Barack Obama has been objectively rated the single most liberal member of the US Senate: 100^th out of 100. In fact, he has the most liberal voting record in US Senate history! Is this just so many words, or does it mean something? To our liberal friends: I know that your fundamental beliefs will be challenged here. But you are invited to respond, hopefully with logic and facts, not rants. Well, let’s take a look by categories.

ENERGY, THE ENVIRONMENT, AND THE ECONOMY

1. Obama thinks the answer to high energy prices is to set our thermostats to a less comfortable level and inflate our tires. The fact is inescapable that liberal Democrats are obstructionists on energy and are squarely responsible for blocking all initiatives on energy policy. See http://archive.redstate.com/blogs/josh_painter/2008/jun/29/dems_to_america_no_you_cant. We will need between 16 and 20% more energy in the next 20 years (http://www.apienergyarcade.com/energyiq/). We need to move forward NOW to open drilling with modern environmental safeguards. We need more nuclear energy, more coal, more natural gas, and more oil. It is inexcusable that current government policy restricts access to 85% of potential offshore U. S. oil and natural gas development sites.

2. Obama is outright lying to the American people about taxing the middle class. He says he won’t raise taxes on the middle class. But he says he will take away the Bush tax cuts. That’s a tax increase, no matter how you spin it. Further, he has a free lunch syndrome: free college, free health care, free job training, free child care, more subsidized housing, government subsidized 401(k) plans, etc. Here’s a clue: There is no free lunch. According to the nonpartisan National Taxpayers Union, Obama’s fiscal agenda will cost $344 billion per year (http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=300409426744996). He is running on a campaign of higher payroll taxes, higher corporate taxes, higher income taxes, eliminating the Bush tax cuts, higher taxes on dividends, and higher capital gains taxes. In fact, see this link to understand why there are 4 ways that Obama’s plan actually RAISES taxes on the middle class: http://http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2116252/posts.  While I am fed up with Democrat’s and Republican’s continued failure to balance the budget, I have more hope for Obama’s opponent than for Obama. John McCain has been a long time champion against pork barrel spending, and has been a budget hawk more than most in Washington.

3. Obama’s tax policies will hurt the economy. Our economy is in a precarious situation. I think that if we falter here, a very serious recession is possible. Here is a most interesting comparison to the Depression era president Herbert Hoover. Hoover dramatically raised taxes in 1932 during the Depression, which economists now recognize as perhaps the biggest tax blunder in American history. This sucked money out of the productive economy. And there is more to compare with Herbert Hoover. According to the book How Capitalism Saved America by Thomas DiLorenzo, here are some things that Hoover stood for: labor union power (which slowed production during the Depression), minimum wages (which increased unemployment during the Depression), international tariffs via the “Smoot-Hawley-Hoover Act” (which slowed international trade during the Depression), and controls on industry including the electric power and oil industries (which depressed the economy further). Do these policies sound familiar? The segment of the economy that will be hurt the most is small business owners. He says he will “cut capital gains taxes for small businesses.” But small businesses DO NOT PAY CAPITAL GAINS TAXES; THEY PAY INCOME TAXES! My wife and I counted up; we regularly do business with over 2 dozen small business owners, and we hate to think how they will suffer under an Obama presidency.

Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it.   —Ronald Reagan (1986)

4. Obama does not understand basic economics. His answer to any problem is a government solution. But remember this: Government does not produce anything; it only re-allocates, which is always subjective. The government’s role is to get out of the way so free enterprise will work best, while setting rules for fair play, that is, laws against fraud, collusion, etc. Ronald Reagan insisted that the best answer is “to get the government off the backs of the people.” Over time, the more capitalism is allowed to flourish, the better off everyone at every socio-economic level becomes. The goal of our economy is to produce more goods and services that people want at an affordable price. Anything that hinders that goal will hurt the economy. That’s why corporate taxes should be minimized, so production and employment are not hindered. His promise to tax corporations while not hurting the middle class is ignorant socialist ideology; any tax on corporations will effect anyone negatively who gets a paycheck from the company or buys products from the company! Individual taxes should be minimized, so people can buy what is produced (and still have something left to save). Thomas DiLorenzo in his book How Capitalism Saved America proves that every time that government has intervened with a solution to a problem (no matter how well-intentioned), it ends up making it worse. Before you challenge this, read this book. Every American ought to read it. Check out these essays from Investor’s Business Daily: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/series8.aspx.

Here’s my specific suggestion. As President, John McCain should appoint Congressman Ron Paul to head a special committee to examine ways to reduce the size of the federal government.

5.  Obama’s policies will hurt the two things we need the most right now: energy and capital. Obama’s answer for both of these needs is to tax them more. Look, the more you tax something, the less of it you get. For example, Obama favors a windfall profits tax on oil companies. Jimmy Carter tried an excess profits tax with devastating effects (http://www.taxhistory.org). It didn’t work then, and it won’t work now. Carter’s experiment stopped domestic energy exploration and made America more dependent on foreign sources of oil.

6.  Obama wants to raise the capital gains tax. Our great financial institutions are struggling for capital, which they must have to get housing and other parts of our economy back on a solid footing. Our great banks are having to beg for capital from overseas sources. Just when we desperately need more capital formation, Obama wants to hinder that too by raising the capital gains tax. Obama is pushing nonsense, and it seriously threatens our economy. And by the way, your 401(k) will suffer as well.

7.  Obama’s attack on Exxon Mobil is misplaced and dangerous. We ask: why would Obama and the other liberals single out the oil industry for their vitriol? Here are some facts that will shock the liberals: All of the world’s top 10 largest oil and natural gas companies based on reserves are owned and operated by foreign governments (http://www.apienergyarcade.com/energyiq/index.html). American oil companies make about 9 cents in gross profit per dollar of sales. This is far below many other industries; for example, electronics companies make about 14 cents per dollar of sales. While Exxon Mobil earned $11 billion in the 2008 second quarter, they paid $32 billion in taxes! And Exxon Mobil employs 82,000 people. Exxon Mobil is GOOD for the economy, not BAD! Further, from 2000 through 2005, U. S. oil and gas companies invested over $75 billion dollars in emerging technologies in North America (such as biomass, wind, solar, alternative fuel vehicles, gas-to-liquids and oil shale.) Why would Obama want to kill the goose that is laying the golden egg (http://www.apienergyarcade.com/energyiq/)? Attacking the oil companies is what Venezuela does, not America!

8.  The liberals’ obstructionist attitude toward the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) and the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) is misplaced. The arctic has enough oil to meet America’s needs for 12 years (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601082&sid=aqEDMhrCvp28). By the way, ANWR is a frozen tundra with no trees or rivers. The liberals’ (i.e. Obama and Company) consistent blocking of development there is based on false utopian ideas of pristine wilderness. Not only are these ideas false, oil development of the region would not spoil what is there. Development of ANWR will impact only about 2,000 acres of the 19.9 million acre refuge. Even the residents of the area support drilling there (http://www.anwr.org/people/people.htm). We are in a new era of demand from emerging nations that will overwhelm efforts at conservation, so we must DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, and PAY LESS. McCain is playing politics on this too, but at least he supports drilling in the OCS.

9.  The solar solution is a no solution. Solar, the poster child for environmentalists, will account for only around 5% of U. S. energy needs by 2020 (http://www.apienergyarcade.com/energyiq/). It is not an energy savior. I have extensive personal knowledge of solar. Because of unique circumstances, my wife and I have to rely on a solar/wind installation for 100% of our power for our rural Texas home. While we feel fortunate to have it, I can tell you that off-grid power is so expensive that it will never pay for itself, no matter how high the price of grid power gets. And it is incredibly wasteful of resources. Environmental religionists conveniently ignore how much fossil fuel energy it took to mine the lead in our necessary 48 battery bank (each battery weighs 200 pounds), not to mention the fossil fuels expended in constructing the building to house the batteries, the resources to produce the solar panels or the large back-up generator to provide power (when there is inadequate sun and the batteries are depleted). We are so green we are in the red. The same objections can be said for battery powered cars.

10.  Extreme environmentalism will hurt the economy AND the environment. By the way, I am as much of an environmentalist as the next guy. I have worked to pass 3 pieces of environmental legislation in our region. Government does have a role to control what economists call “spillover costs,” the classic example being pollution. But the problem with extreme environmental positions is that they go beyond science to a utopian philosophy which pits capitalism against environmentalism. It is no accident that the country with the best environmental record is the USA, which happens to be the beacon of capitalism. The logic is simple: If you hurt the economy we cannot afford strong environmental controls.

11.  Extreme environmentalism is anti-poor. The poorer one is, the more ultra-environmentalism’s high gasoline costs damage the family budget. See http://www.gerrycharlottephelps.com/2008/06/core-says-globa.html.

12.  Extreme environmentalism is a utopian religion. 31,000 scientists have signed a petition doubting that global warming is man-made (http://www.tulsabeacon.com/?p=462). Here’s the way I see the ultra-environmentalist movement. When its proponents are unwilling to listen to contrary evidence, it ceases to be science. There is plenty of contrary evidence against Al Gore’s thesis. But it is accepted by many on faith in the face of evidence against it. Ultra-environmentalism must therefore be considered a fundamentalist religion. And Obama is a priest of its dogma. The evidence now strongly supports that carbon is NOT the culprit with global warming: http://michaelsavage.com/.

FAMILY AND ETHICAL ISSUES

13.  Obama supports partial-birth abortion and infanticide. He is the most pro-abortion member of the Senate. He supports the late-term procedure known as partial-birth abortion, where the baby’s skull is stabbed with scissors while in the birth canal and the brains are sucked out to end its life swiftly and ease passage of the corpse into the pan. And get this: In the Illinois Senate in 2003, Obama voted against legislation protecting a child who was born alive despite an attempted abortion (the Induced Infant Liability Act). Here’s the audio where Obama is caught red-handed in his infanticide support: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ypDwNpgIUQc. Note, we are discussing killing breathing kids. Here are the transcripts: http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/aug/21/in-2002-barack-obama-supported-infanticide-a/. You ought to check out this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfL_H7zg1QI&feature=related, but especially  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIdbYjmbFzo. Further, there is adequate evidence that he has tried to cover up his vote: http://www.nrlc.org/ObamaBAIPA/ObamaCoverup.html). This is the same legislation that passed unanimously in the U. S. Senate before Obama got there. Obama has promised Planned Parenthood that the first piece of legislation he will sign is the Freedom of Choice Act. This act would overturn every piece of state or federal legislation that puts any reasonable restriction on abortion. For example, it would overturn partial birth abortion restrictions, abortions after viability, abortions after the baby has a heartbeat and fingerprints, parental notification and consent legislation, inclusion of unborn children in health care plans, health and safety rules for abortion clinics, and required education and waiting periods for women wanting abortions. This is no longer merely a religious issue. Because science has allowed us to see the unborn baby in the womb (and doctors are now operating on unborn babies under 22 weeks of age), there is even now an emerging pro-life atheist movement. And it is no longer a Republican issue as many Democrats in the Congress are now pro-life and the majority of Americans want reasonable restrictions on abortion. Obama’s views are ghastly and out of the mainstream (http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=8482). His views would give the unborn baby, and even one born and breathing, the same consideration as a tumor or an inflamed appendix.

 14 week old baby in the womb, sucking her thumb.

14.  Obama’s views on abortion are anti-black. The National Black Pro-Life Union points out that Obama’s position on abortion supports the ideas of racist Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood: (http://www.nationalblackprolifeunion.com/). Margaret Sanger was an advocate of racial cleansing. Based on current trends, 2 million black babies would be aborted during an Obama term.

15.  Obama is anti traditional family. The importance of the traditional family cannot be minimized. Listen up women: Barack Obama struggled over whether marriage had become “an outdated institution.” See:(http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTRhNzk0YzI5OTQ2M2Q0ODRlMWRjYjFmODI5NDgxMzU=). And further denigrating the institution of marriage, Obama supports gay marriage. Barack Obama supports the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (http://www.onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.aspx?id=208420). Whenever it goes to a vote, Americans usually vote 2 to 1 against gay marriage. Obama wants to appoint judges that will force gay marriage on us. This whole debate is based on the idea that some people are born gay. That idea has no basis in science, which homosexual activists are now acknowledging (http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/aug/08080605.html)!! The real problem for those in a homosexual lifestyle is not discrimination, but rather physical devastation: shorter life span, more disease, etc. (http://www.familyresearchinst.org/). The real bottom line is surprisingly simple: Every child has the right to a mother and a father. Statistics confirm that children do much better in a traditional family.

NATIONAL SECURITY

16.  Obama has a dangerously naïve view of the War on Terror. His approach has been to pull out of Iraq immediately and focus our efforts on prosecuting terrorists through the courts. Think about this. We only get the opportunity to prosecute terrorists through the courts after they have committed an act of terror, and then only if we can catch them. Prosecuting the terrorists who committed the World Trade Center bombings did not prevent 9/11. One of the masterminds of the World Trade Center bombing who successfully avoided the law was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khalid_Shaikh_Mohammed). He became the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks and several other terrorist acts. While none of us like the war in Iraq, the facts are clear: President Bush has prevented further terrorist attacks on our soil for 7 years. As Ann Coulter said, “Produce one person who believed, on Sept. 12, 2001, that there would not be another attack for 7 years, and I’ll consider downgrading Bush from ‘Great” to ‘Really Good’.”

17.  He has a dangerously utopian view of evil, similar to others on the far left. Evidence for this is that he opposes the Patriot Act and the missile defense system. He thinks that we can just all be nice guys and get along. All of history proves this to be wrong. The great American leaders have had one thing in common: the willingness to stand boldly against evil. Think of George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt, and Ronald Reagan. Barack Obama would sell the American soul to the forces of evil in a utopian dream. The danger of this cannot be overstated. See this link:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3369102968312745410.

18.  Obama refuses to acknowledge the success of The Surge. He implies that we were just lucky that the locals turned against Al Qaeda and the Sunni insurgents. He refuses to give credit to our tremendous fighting men and women in Iraq. This infuriates me. America has kicked butt in Iraq and beaten the insurgents. While one can argue whether we should have gotten into Iraq in the first place, it was crucial to win in order that terrorists not regain momentum. If he can’t admit the surge worked after the fact, how can voters count on him to keep his mind open to the facts on other important foreign-policy decisions?

19.  Hamas has endorsed Barack Obama for American President (http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives2/2008/04/020315.php). Certainly, the American people should take note of this. This says something very frightening about Obama.

20.  Obama said he would meet without pre-conditions with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a man who has vowed to obliterate Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad). (Being consistently stupid, he also would meet with other lunatics like Hugo Chavez, Fidel Castro, and Kim Jung Il.) This appeasement strategy may sound reasonable to some, but again it is a dangerously naïve view of the War on Terror. Prior to World War II, British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neville_Chamberlain) took a similar approach to Hitler. At the time, Hitler’s position of authority was weak as he was appointed Chancellor while his Nazi party only had 37% of the votes. Chamberlain’s visit to Hitler in Germany strengthened Hitler’s prestige and power and this policy of appeasement ultimately weakened the Allies’ preparedness. Even Obama’s Democrat opponent Hillary Clinton warned against Obama’s approach to appeasement of this extraordinarily dangerous Iranian leader. Obama must be criticized for not learning from history.

ELITISM

21.  Obama supports the liberal view of “two Americas,” making a mokery of his goal to bring Americans together. Have you noticed how some liberals, though certainly not all, tend to vilify successful men and institutions? This classism is exactly the wrong approach. Instead of tearing down the successful, we ought to use them as models of encouragement for those who need a lift. In my generation, kids were taught that we could achieve anything we set our mind on. We looked up to the successful among us. This is the positive and uplifting uniquely American message of upward mobility. As Cal Thomas says (http://www.calthomas.com/index.php?news=2294), “America once was a country of overcomers. Today, we are not about overcoming. The successful are not studied to see how they succeeded. Their stories of overcoming obstacles are not told, at least in their totality…Obama’s economic doctrine subsidizes people who make wrong decisions and does little to encourage them to make right ones.” This is a trait of tyrannical governments, not of the America that I know. I want to see leaders that encourage every American to work hard and make personal and family decisions that improve their chance of success, rather than preaching negativism, that the successful are to be punished, that success is beyond one’s control because of race, class, poverty, etc.

22.  Obama said that small-town Americans “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them” out of bitterness over lost jobs. I must say, this statement stunned me. Those who say that he is a liberal elitist have evidence to back it up. Such comments are especially telling coming from a man who claims to be bringing Americans together. This is not healthy. I want to see America ONE Nation under God again, fighting shoulder-to-shoulder against evil and toward noble shared goals such as going to the moon and energy independence.

23.  Obama’s view of America is consistent with the America-haters he has associated with. Rev. Jeremiah Wright, his pastor for 20 years, is a prime example. Wright’s Black Liberation Theology is essentially a combination of Marxism and white hatred in a religious coat. This “theology” is based on Professor James Cone views, which are says “To be black is to be committed to destroying everything this country loves and adores.” (http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=3386) Along with Rev. Wright’s hateful comments about America we note Michelle Obama’s comments about how she has never before been proud of her country. Let’s not forget Louis Farrakhan, Supreme Minister of the Nation of Islam, a severe critic of American society. Then there is the unrepentant terrorist William Ayers (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/17/ayers-and-obama-what-is-t_n_97204.html). It seems that Senator Obama lives in a world of hatred and distrust toward America. How can we expect to get anything better if he is President? Incidentally, Obama reportedly regularly carries a Hindu monkey god charm (http://www.traditionalvalues.org/modules.php?sid=3394).

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

24.  Obama is a radical leftist-socialist. Obama’s idea of boilerplate redistribution of wealth is pure socialism. One of Obama’s favorite terms is “ensuring economic justice.” This is code for socialism. It also means, “Let’s get the successful peopel and the corporations.” To a very real degree, when companies large and small thrive, so does the entire economy. Obama’s leftist views were developed by a cadre of socialist/communist associations in his life, as proven by Jerome Corsi in his book The Obama Nation. In a Wall Street Journal interview, Senator Obama discussed his view that we are in a “winner take all” economy, in which “the gains from economic growth skew heavily toward the wealthy.” This is a comment that has been heard in every Marxist country. Americans should take note that the Communist Party USA likes Obama: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Election2008/Default.aspx?id=210820. No good way has ever been found to enforce limits on income and wealth. Every well-meant effort (Marxism, high taxes, government regulation, etc.) has done far more harm than good. Of course, he supports universal health care since everyone has a right to it. By this same logic, everyone has a right to housing and food, so should we support universal federal housing and food? Wise men understood the problem with this thinking. Winston Churchill said, “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.” John F. Kennedy said, “A rising tide lifts all boats.” Obama’s attack on the successful is not justice. The top 5% of earners already pay 60% of the taxes. Using the power of government to take from some people to give to others is theft! And it takes America down a path to a socialistic second-rate economy.

   Obama crony Bill Ayers

25.  The comments Obama has made about ignoring the Constitution are alarming: http://www.floppingaces.net/2008/06/20/obama-the-living-constitution-and-the-socialization-of-america/. His stated criterion for appointing judges is that they have “empathy.” Good night, nurse! The President of the United States does not promise to uphold empathy but to uphold the Constitution ! Obama supports letting judges void mortgage contracts. America is based on the rule of law and thus the validity of contracts. If we start voiding contracts, where do we stop? This is the road to tyranny!

26. Obama supports the failed education policies of the past. His support of education labor unions is unwavering. This education bureacracy has led to one of the worst school systems in the world by every statistical measure. What is Obama’s answer: more of the same. He wants to spend billions for pre-school education at government expense. Endocrinating young school kids is what dictatorships always try. It is not in keeping with a free society. Education is like all other endeavors – the more you socialize it, the worse it performs. Obama was a committee chairman in the Illinois Senate that wanted to push sex ed on kindergartners: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=&SessionId=3&GA=93&DocTypeId=SB&DocNum=99&GAID=3&LegID=734&SpecSess=&Session=. See also: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2083157/posts.

27.  Obama is proving to be a FLIPPER worse than John Kerry. Here’s a list of things he has changed his mind on: offshore drilling, a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, the Surge, whether the Iranian Quds Force is a terrorist group, immunity for telecom companies participating in the Terrorist Surveillance Program, warrantless wiretapping, campaign finance, free trade, NAFTA, gun control, corporate tax rates, Jerusalem as the undivided capital of Israel, merit pay for teachers, accepting public campaign money, disavowing Jeremiah Wright, flag pins, Social Security, and the list keeps growing: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=298769662128800,  http://www.newsmax.com/morris/Obama_Flip_Flops/2008/07/16/113485.html, and here’s more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121685888325079319.html?mod=djemEditorialPage. What next? Not only that, he refuses to explain these changes as if nobody noticed. He seems to be for change all right – for changing his mind. The real issue here is whether Obama is a man of principles or a man of expediency and politics as usual. I think he’s a phony. We know what he really believes. Remember that 100 out of 100 ranking?

LAW AND ORDER

28.  He has said that he will deal with street level drug dealing as a “minimum wage affair.” What?? He has admitted using illegal drugs marijuana and cocaine in high school and college. The key word here is illegal.

29.  He voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. I guess he thinks that car manufacturers are guilty of drunk driving too.

30.  He supports giving drivers’ licenses and extending welfare and Social Security to illegal immigrants. The key word here is illegal.

EXPERIENCE

31.  Obama is inexperienced. Even he has admitted that his experience makes him unqualified: http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/06/barack-obama-says-he-is-not-experienced.html.

Mr. Meek is a retired investment advisor. He and with his wife Cindy now operate a Christian apologetics website www.faithfacts.org, which focuses on examining religion from the standpoint of reason and evidence. Note: This article is available in PDF format on request at cmeek01@msn.com.