Looking forward to an Obama Presidency
For months now, the liberal Democrats have been salivating at the prospect at having one of the most liberal of their group as President of the United States. The fact that Obama is African American is just a big bonus to them. I believe what they are really excited about is the liberal policies he will enact, if elected as President. Barack Obama talks a lot about hope and change, the kind of change that will bring us together as Americans. If he defeats John McCain in November, I am afraid we will see the kind of change we neither want or need.
During the Republican primaries, much ado was made about Mitt Romney and the different positions he was taking on the issues. “Flip Flop” was a well deserved moniker for the former governor of Massachusetts. As true as that was, it is no less true for Barack Obama. Let’s take a look at some of these positions, shall we?
To start with, Obama has made it very clear how he feels about some of us who “cling to God and guns”. I realize that the statement Obama made was in reference to the Pennsylvania area that had lost so many jobs, but the man seems to want to have his cake and eat it too. He says he supports the 2nd Amendment, but is also for local handgun bans. Someone needs to explain to him that he can’t have it both ways. As for the Supreme Court’s recent ruling concerning the Washington DC handgun ban, he has issued a statement agreeing with the ruling, saying the ban went too far. However, in an interview with ABC’s Leon Harris, on February 21, 2008, he said something entirely different. You can read a portion of the interview here.
Barack Obama also seems to be confused as to where his campaign money should be coming from. His campaign raised concerns last year about Hilliary Clinton’s association with Sant Chatwal, an influential Indian that has raised a lot of money for the Clinton campaign. (From what I have read, the man sounds like a total crook to me, but that is another story.) It seems that Obama is getting along very nicely with Sant Chatwal, now that the man has pledged to raise $10,000,000 for the Obama campaign. Again, Barack Obama is trying to have it both ways, raising moral concerns about the Clintons and then reversing himself when it comes to his own campaign. Vanity Fair has the entire story.
The Obama campaign also has decided that union contributions aren’t so bad after all. Earlier in the campaign, he described those unions as special interest groups, mainly because Hilliary Clinton and John Edwards were the ones receiving their support. Now, he says the unions are representatives of the people. The Washington Post has more on the story.
Speaking of campaign finance, Obama has also went back on his promise to accept public financing of his general election campaign. US News has more on that story. Either Barack Obama has trouble making up his mind or he is playing his cards whither the wind blows. I am leaning towards the latter.
As many times as he has changed his position on different issues, there are some positions that have remained constant throughout his political career. One of those is his position on abortion. He has stated that he believes it is okay for states to restrict late-term partial birth abortions, but that the restrictions should have provisions to protect the life and health of the mother. That being said, Barack Obama has consistently fought against any effort to restrict abortion in any manner. He seems to want to make sure abortion is accessible to any woman who decides she doesn’t want her baby. You can read more in my earlier post about his support of abortion.
Freedom to choose or freedom to murder
Yes, we have a lot to look forward to if Barack Obama is elected President in November. There will be higher taxes, less restriction on abortion, most likely more gun control, (if I know a liberal when I see one) and God knows what else. I have read a lot of blog articles that are subscribing to the idea that an Obama presidency is not necessarily a bad thing. These writers are going with the idea that a President has only so much influence on issues such as abortion, but I whole heartedly disagree. Those of you who are supporters of Mike Huckabee know how we felt about him and how he could frame the national debate on the issues we all care about. We believed (still do believe) that Huckabee would be able to influence our nation in a good way, simply from the bully pulpit of the office of President. If we believed that, then why do we seem to believe that Barack Obama, as President, wouldn’t be able to influence our country in the opposite direction?
I realize we need to work to elect as many conservatives as our state and national representatives. This will certainly help minimize the effect Obama has on our country and will damper him down a bit. To believe that a President Barack Obama will not do permanent damage to our country, however, is a big mistake. We do not need to have someone like him in office for any length of time, even if we believe that his policies will pave the way to elect Mike Huckabee in four years. If that happens, our country may never be able to recover from the fiscal and social disaster that will be a Obama presidency.
That’s my take!
Larry
[digg=http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Looking_forward_to_an_Obama_Presidency]
There is no doubt in my mind Barack Obama is a dangerous man. My personal preference would be for him to go back to Chicago and do some more organizing, leaving the rest of the country alone. I am not convinced he has this country’s best interests in his sights. What does he really stand for besides higher taxes and stressing the need for socialism? I am not impressed.
I am afraid our country is not going to realize just how dangerous he really is until the damage is already done.