Obama could help U.S. see its faults

D. Bobby’s many faults:

1. “America is always wrong” critics are a dime-a-dozen — who’s hiring them?

2. Will criticize for food.

3. Will critically-think for food.

4. Price of oil is off 60% and Hugo Chavez is scrambling for cash — what now, Einstein?

5. Despite offer from Neil Boortz for a one-way ticket to Algeria — D. Bobby staying in USA — why?

Thanks for the laughs, D. Bobby. Happy to dump you off at Six Mile & Livernois some Friday night, to see how long you last. Pinhead.

Poor Hussein, nobody’s been responding in kind to his name-calling. Sad, sad….

Time for a new schtick, Hussein! (The old one’s just plain boring.)

If Drew likes Great Britain and the rest of Europe so much, I think he ought to move there. He won’t be missed over here.

“Time for a new schtick, Hussein! (The old one’s just plain boring.)”

You’re bleeding stupidity. Good job — keep it going. You’ll make a great government worker. Midget-IQ.

D. Bobby — there are 30,000,000 ILLEGAL ALIENS who would take your U.S. citizenship in two seconds. Turn it in, and get out, dummy.

“If Drew likes Great Britain and the rest of Europe so much, I think he ought to move there. He won’t be missed over here.”

Neither will a lot of others, according to you

“Now that this is over I just want to say loudly and proudly that everyone who voted for Obama is a communist traitor undeserving of life, let alone citizenship in this country.

“And anyone who is white or Christian who voted for Obama is a traitor to their race and/or their religion (as the case may be).”

Charming viewpoints, there, Jason. Care to elaborate?

Obama Supporters:

I’m am not a resentful Republican, indeed I am not a Republican at all. I do not write this in the spirit of someone with any investment, emotional, monetary or otherwise in this last election or its candidates. I write as a concerned American. I’ve not lived through many elections in my lifetime, and fewer still have I observed with a perceptive eye, but what I see now is unlike anything I have yet. What I speak of is an enthusiasm and even adoration displayed to an extent with which all of American history provides but few if any comparisons. I am saddened not only because it is my firm belief that this esteem is missed placed, but also because it is dangerous in and of itself.

I would like to turn to the recipient of this acclaim, Barack Obama. I cannot speak for others but to my mind what I am about to say is equally applicable to nearly all politicians. I do not mean to imply that others are of a different ilk, but Obama has taken center stage, and it is the attention paid to him that concerns me. I will not expend time on his tacit support of two wars and ominous rumblings about still more. I do not wish to belabor his oft stated but ill defined calls for “service” and “voluntarism” that have all the historic connotations of tyranny What I will do is point out that some of his promises can only be fulfilled at the expense of our liberty, the supposed reason we should tolerate a government in the first place. Although he has made many promises, indeed often mutually exclusive ones, I will make no attempt to address them all. The principles behind his promises are the same so an examination of only one is sufficient. That promise is healthcare.

I understand that for many people this is a major day to day concern. I realize that for many million this promise is a dream come true. Genuine as the emotion behind these sentiments are, their implementation cannot justifiably trump morality. Nor can they come to successful fruition without a careful account to reality. Like some of you, I do not have health insurance. However I would go without it rather than have see it come from the government. I have a number of reasons for this position. I am more than satisfied that healthcare requires a quality of service that experience shows the government cannot provide. Although I share this sentiment with many millions who took to the polls, and millions more who did not, I’m not going to try and convince you of this. What I am going to do is show that supporting such a program at all entails a crime in and of itself, and is unworthy of your support, tacit or otherwise.

As much as you desire healthcare I am sure you would never hold a gun to my or any other innocent persons head and demand they pay for it. However Obama will do this, and he will do it in your name. I submit that if it is wrong to do something yourself, it is no less wrong to have someone else do it on your behalf. This is what government does, and there is no compelling reason to have a double standard for the government in this regard. People often site voting as reversing the moral polarity of a matter. Most would acknowledge for instance that if Obama approached someone off the street and demanded money at gun point, it would be a crime. However if this same scenario is altered by your neighbors electing him to do so on their behalf, it is transformed from a crime into a moral imperative. However “right” and “wrong” are not functions of popularity. The world is as round today as it was when most people believed it wasn’t. Slavery was just as wrong in 1850 as it is today, despite what the majority of people may have thought. And theft is wrong no matter who is holding the gun, or the reason why. An action like taking money for healthcare does not rise above theft because a majority favors it. Peoples desire to take your money does not translate into their taking your money being ethical. If Obama is to have your support, you must see his deeds in a light other than truth. You will have to pretend that the magic of the ballot box turns evil to good.

What is the basis of my obligation to those who would use the government to commit the crimes they would not themselves commit? Though I have committed no offence Obama will use the threat of force to extort the money I earn. I understand that few of you would couch this discussion in these terms, however they are warranted. A person who supports the Iraq war by claiming that no innocents are harmed and that everyone killed there is a terrorist, doesn’t have a point. They are hiding behind semantics by calling something that is wrong good. If you do not like to think about taxes as theft, you’re deluding yourself no less. You have no choice to pay taxes; the government demands your money or your life. If you do not acquiesce to this threat, you face imprisonment, and even death. There are no conscientious objectors to the IRS, only prisoners and corpses. This kind of extortion cannot be considered voluntary or as a fee for a “service.” Attempting to do so is just another attempt to call evil by another name.

Though Obama’s support for taking others money is often hailed as some kind of philanthropy on his part, the reality of the situation does not warrant such a label. I don’t think we should pretend he does so out of any charitable inclination on his own part, because at the end of the day it’s not even his money he is giving away. It would be more accurate to recognize his promises as just another cynical ploy to gain political power, just as all political promises are. When you pretend that his plans for mass extortion are “good” you are making valuations based on falsehood. By voting for him or by supporting him you are giving him more power to do evil in your name. Bush has no power, not because he is a lame duck, but because he has no support. By giving Obama your support and in to many cases, your love, you are arming Obama with perceived moral authority the likes of which have almost never been see in America. Such power should give even his supporters pause if not concern. Is your esteem for the man is so high that you would accept the persecution of those who do not feel as you do? These wonderful things you hope to receive will have strings attached and over time they will become chains, for the government cannot give without also taking. Perhaps to your mind the chains of slavery are a comfort, a release from responsibility and uncertainty or even something you are owed. Whatever you may feel, they come at the cost of your liberty. I suppose that is your choice to make, however you cannot make that choice for others, but you do nothing less if you support this man. I know many of you preach tolerance and acceptance. If you hold those principles dear you cannot support a man who promises to violate the will of millions in the name of the majority. Please have the conscience to see that your support for this man, whatever form it may take, will empower him to aggress against millions of your fellows. Please consider this in the years to come. I will not ask you to cast off your shackles, only that you respect the wishes of others to never wear them.

Re-submitting to British rule will instantaneously remove that burden!

Who votes that we should shoot Drew out of a cannon and across the pond to merry old England? If not the least we could do it drop this moron off in the middle of one of the mine fields littering the Falklands.

Lysander Spooner said:
“A whole lot of stuff…”

Intelligence covets brevity.

PS:

Did you really just invoke the name of an pseudo-anarchist/socialist to rail against Obama’s “socialist” agenda??? Whoa, I cannot process how ridiculous you came across.

Intelligence covets brevity.

Words to live by Ken, words to live by.

Out of Afghanistan?! Obama never preached that. He wanted to move MORE troops into Afghanistan. Get the facts about your America hating, Communist, Messiah right.

Right on Drew! All you naysayers are either in denial or uneducated on the issues. My favorite: “Two center-right corporate parties have a systematic stranglehold on our political system”

Fredrik, Fredrik, Fredrik… quit giving Drew a blowjob. I mean do you really need support Drew’s every word? He is easily the worst writer out of this so-called band of journalists know as the State News.

Ken I’m no socialist. A witty remark proves nothing. If your only critique is that my point isnt short, thats pretty pathetic. But hay whatever makes you feel smart.

Socialism/communism/liberalism will always fail, Drew. In their attempt at utopia on earth, these ideologies are not able to account for the expression of the human soul. In order for socialism/communism/liberalism to work, the soul must be suppressed.
Barack Obama gives you false hope, Drew. You bought into the hype. You bought into the very propaganda you proclaim to resent. Once the media-fabricated bitterness of the “last eight years” wears off, the American people will realize that “hope and change” are nothing more than campaign slogans.

I never thought I’d read a State News writer worse than Matt Treadwell.

What’s sad is that Drew didn’t even do his homework on the political system of Britain. While they may have 12 political parties (I think the US does too.), there really are only 2 that control the whole thing and have for the past several decades. Obviously he didn’t read that far into Wikipedia. Does he not realize that the British made more mistakes during their colonial days than the US is making now and that their economic system is on the verge of a bigger collapse than ours? His comparing the Falklands War as a shining example of how to fight a war versus the current Iraq situation or Vietnam? Way to cherry pick Drew. It’s obvious your knowledge of history only looks through revisionist glasses at US history. Seriously Drew, if you’re going to write this kind of stuff at least don’t be so misleading in your history. It’s sad that English majors think they know so damn much about US and world history when they really don’t.

I read this column as satire. I mean, yes, he wanted to make some points as well, and they were over the top—but I don’t know if it is worth all this anger/analysis.

“What’s sad is that Drew didn’t even do his homework on the political system of Britain ..”

Also the culture. Most Euros do what they parents did. D. Bobby would be repairing cars, now. Thank God, there are some market forces in the U.K. — and Lady Thatcher.

Are English majors all this ignorant? My God — how appalling.

“Happy to dump you off at Six Mile & Livernois some Friday night, to see how long you last.”

McNichols and Livernois is right by UofD-Mercy and the Detroit Golf Club. It isn’t a bad area.

JVD, Lysander: Get a grip, bit over the top on your concerns here don’t you think? If you’re really the paranoid maybe you should talk with your health professionals. Drew really knows how to get the edges jumping mad. Think of the children! AAAAHH Godzilla!

Ken – care to support your charge of Lysander Spooner as a Socialist? I’ll grant you he seemed friendly enough to anarchical government structure, but unsure I’ve heard of his being a Socialist. And while I’m not fully on board with anarchy as a government superstructure, I do very much despise the direction we’ve been heading away from liberty towards increasingly reduced personal liberties and vulnerability to government tyranny. You need only hear James Moran (D-VA) speak of “a simplistic notion that people who have wealth are entitled to keep it.” Apparently either the 5th Amendment means nothing, or the DUE PROCESS clause is wide enough to drive a truck through at Moran’s discretion of course.

Beau – if you spew out charges of paranoia, presumably without having read enough to cultivate a justifiable concern about how far Constitutional protections of liberty have been degraded by nationalistic power grabs, then I’d have to say shame on you.

I take offense – I’m the worst State News journalist guys

Michael, could you explain exactly what an “anarchical government structure” would be? Somehow I had thought anarchy meant no government, and consequently no government structure (or “superstructure”) at all.

Michael: I don’t know how much reading I need to do to qualify for what ever it is you are implying I need to qualify for, you didn’t quantify the number. Per George, same, same here. As for the paranoia comment on my part. Still applies to some above, JVD-yes. Dan, well Dan is Dan and he is in a class all by himself. I think the DSM-VR will have a classification called Dan for the diagnostic. Lysander-yes. See, anyone on either fringe of the left or right are almost by definition paranoid or they wouldn’t hold such sharply narrow views. Part of the diagnosis is a person reading hidden meaning or threat into otherwise rather benign remarks. Having distrust and suspiciousness of others motives and interpreting them as malevolent regardless of the others actual intent. The list goes on but you get the drift. Maybe you should do some reading in this area you may find it somewhat threatening.