Tuesday, September 30, 2008

How electing Obama will hurt the poor

1. The National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL) gives him a score of 100% on his pro-choice voting record. I think Ashley Judd noted that in a TV enterview yesterday (Hollywood stars are important supporters of our glamcan). Did you know approximately 79% of Planned Parenthood clinics are placed in target minority neighborhoods. While African-Americans make up only about 13% of the U.S. population, their abortions account for 35% of the total. Since Roe v. Wade was passed in 1973, there have been 13 million African-American abortions in a U.S. black population estimated at some 37 million. Genocide against the poor is a not-so-subtle way to reduce poverty.

2. A lot of you think the poor don't pay taxes. Oh, they do, just not federal income taxes. That's for the middle class and rich. But by far, the rich pay the largest share of federal income taxes. Along with their big incomes, they have big, hot shot lawyers and accountants. Obama will actually get less tax money if he rescinds the Bush tax cuts, but that doesn't matter, because what he cares about is "fairness." Punishing the rich by taking from them. So he'll need to drop down a few pay grades to the ordinary middle class to make up the difference.

3. But we have all kinds of taxes factored into our system. That $1,000 tax rebate for working families? Guess where it will go. Look at your computer or your shoes or a lightbulb. Wrapped by and bundled in taxes from the designer's table to the cashier's hand. And Obama's plan to "tax the rich" will affect every product and service the worker and non-worker alike has to purchase. If you think shareholders will earn less or CEOs will just roll over and accept less, think again. The cost of the product and service will go up. The poor pay a larger percentage of their income for food and basic services than you do. Every product that gets to the store has been taxed many times at many levels by many businesses, and those are the very folks Obama wants to tax more. Why in the world would you think that cost wouldn't be passed on to you? Or to the poor?

4. When the cost of gasoline goes up because Obama and friends are going to make it increasingly difficult to be energy independent with oil and coal as well as new technology and alternatives, it's the guy earning less than $40,000 who will be hurt the most, and it's his family who will have less money to spend because it is going into the gas tank.

5. When electricity rates go up because Obama and friends don't like coal, will they ask the working poor to sit in the dark and not turn on their TVs?

6. When the environmental regulations keep getting stepped up by Obama and friends, it's the poor who will be hurt the most with new requirements for their homes, and automobiles.

7. The only accomplishment of the current Democratic Congress (other than the failed bailout) has been the increase in minimum wage, which always hurts the entry level worker and the small businessman the most. We can expect more of this.

8. Obama's dislike and denigration of the military and its worth will close one more door for the poor who will be discouraged from joining the military with a lackluster, weak Commander in Chief. They have traditionally used this method to learn skills and get an advanced education while building their sense of pride and self worth in a country gone soft and valueless. He would rather they become totally dependent on the government rather than serve their country with honor.

9. Obama and friends will up the global warming hype, hurting the poor first, not only in our own country, but also those in the third world.

10. And of course, if Obama wins, racism is over! After all, if he doesn't win, it is racism that kept him from the White House. So if he wins, we're past all that. No more race-based benefits from the government. Think of that!

8 comments:

R. L. said...

I'd love to see some sort of citation for your statements that Obama dislikes and denigrates the military, and to your other assertion that "He would rather they become totally dependent on the government rather than serve their country with honor."

That there is one big conspiracy.. Obama WANTS people to be dependent? Honestly, I think that ranks right up there with the "George W. Bush was behind 9/11" conspiracy.

Norma said...

There is no citation that leftists or marxists want people dependent on government. That's my personal belief based on their track record. It's a power base. No American politician would ever say that.

The military thing is easy. Just go back and look at his respect for what our military accomplished in Iraq. He has spent his Senate career trying to defeat our efforts in Iraq. What soldier would ever want to serve a military headed by him? Victory is not in his vocabulary.

He brags (and lies) he was the only one running for president who opposed the war--yes, when he was a state senator and had no vote and gave a speech at an anti-war rally. His anti-war stance is for his leftist supporters--his voting record is no different than Sen. Clinton's. As his need for voters increased, he has moved more toward the center, but I suspect the military has a long memory.

R. L. said...

Funny how you keep mentioning Democrats and Marxists in the same sentence... can we perhaps see Republicans and Neo-Nazis in similar proximity? No, I didn't think so.

So are you arguing that it's a result of the policies, or a concious philosophy? The two are not the same thing.

And, being against the war in Iraq (against a policy) is not the same thing as being anti-military. It might be anti-interventionist, or you can even argue that it is isolationist. However, that does not equate to anti-miliary. Honestly, I think a stronger argument could be made that McCain's opposition to the new GI Bill is anti-military. Obama supported that, by the way.

So, if Obama was so anti-military, wouldn't he have opposed that bill? Knowing that you can get good educational benefits when you quit would be an inducement to join, wouldn't it?

Norma said...

Sorry Fred. That won't wash. Nazi's are just socialists. It's all about government control. They are the flip side of the marxist pancake. But yes, although most conservatives call Obama a socialist, I have always considered him in his heart of hearts, a marxist.

Being against a war while the nation is at war is anti-military, and if I were career military or even considering enlisting, I'd be outta there if he became president.

R. L. said...

LOL.. I'll refer you back to your history books. They were not socialists - who do you think they locked up first? And who were their allies in the Reichstag? The Conservatives of course.

Also, however, I used the term Neo-Nazis which usually refers to the American incarnation generally accepting Hitler's racist views without any understanding of what the rest of his politics and ideology were. Neo-Nazis are not the same thing as Nazis. Neo-Nazis are not socialists in the least. Neo-Nazis hate the left... which gives much in common with some Conservatives.

*sigh* I know some consider Obama a socialist. They would be wrong. EVEN if he were, that would be different than being a Marxist. Marxism is a form of Socialism, but not all Socialists are Marxists. The actual number of real Marxists in this country is very small. However, its just an insult with little or no meaning.. no different then calling Republicans Fascists. They aren't. And, in fact, equating Republicans with Neo-Nazis is equally unfair. But, ya know, it's your blog and that's how it's done.

Well, we disagree. I think if Obama disagrees with the war, he should speak out. Honestly, I get a little tired of the hyper-patriots that brand you anti-military or whatever simply for disagreeing with the war. Just 'cause we got in there doesn't mean we need to shut up.

Evidently your knowledge of Marxism is sketchy enough to honestly believe that Obama is one.

Anonymous said...

I see your hyper-dem readers don't want to argue on #1, just on opinions where you differ. I disagree with the war too and how poorly thw wins were protected, and I'm not a marxist, however, I also don't believe in abandoning and effort both parties supported in 2003

Norma said...

Even Catholic Democrats run and hide from that one.

R. L. said...

LOL.. I'm NOT a Democrat (if that was directed at me). Dems tend to be a little too conservative for my tastes ;) In fact, they really left me behind when Billy decided to promote half of the Republican wish-list.

I feel compelled, however, to vote for the lesser of two evils. And I see McCain-Palin as a greater evil. I'm sure that's pretty obvious by now.

And.. finally.. I could have argued against #1. I'm pro-choice. For one, I'm tired of the abortion debate. That was has been argued ad nauseum. For another, there are 10 points. I have limited time and energy, although I could have addressed each one. I get the feeling that my visit here isn't always appreciated. Soooo.. I try to limit my responses. Except I'm not very good at that.