Obama? No thanks! – part two

You can find part one here.

Let me reiterate – my goal in these posts is simply to say why I will not be voting for Barack Obama in the upcoming election.  I’m outlining some of his positions, found on his own website, and telling you why I do not agree with them.

One person has replied already and accused me of “defaming” Senator Obama – which is ridiculous.  In order to defame him I’d need to say things about him which are not true, in other words, to slander him.  That’s NOT what I’m doing.  I’m taking HIS own stated positions and telling you why I am not in agreement with them.  With that said…

• Opposition to the privatization of Social Security – Barack Obama is strongly against allowing those vested in Social Security to decide exactly how and where their investment will go (privatization) in order to better serve them.  I think it’s a bad idea to continue pumping money into a program that has worked moderately in the past but is now quickly being depleted of its resources due to mismanagement and misuse.  People should not be FORCED to depend on the government for their retirement, they should be allowed to make their own choices about where their retirement dollars go.  It’s THEIR money in the first place, not the government’s.  It’s hard to trust a government to “be there for you” when the government itself has not proven to be the best at financial management (i.e. national debt, budgets that don’t balance, etc.).  Government-only Social Security?  No thanks!
• Continued expansion of government – Senator Obama’s “blueprint” does not specifically state it this way, but many of his ideas and plans do indeed expand government beyond its already bloated state.  Many of his ideas are no doubt well-intentioned and good, but require too much increase in the size of a government that is already too large.   And where do those increases come from?  The only revenue source available is taxes.  It doesn’t take a math whiz to know that increased programs will have to mean increased taxes.  Some examples of how he would increase the size of government, from his own plan: (1) Creation of an independent watchdog agency to monitor lobbying efforts.  (2) Universal Health Care (see yesterday’s post).  (3) Doubling of funds going to after-school programs.  (4) Increased tax credits for low-income families.  (5) Matching of retirement savings at 50% for the first $1000 saved.  (6) Increase the amount of government help given through the Low Income Home Energy Assitance program.  Increase the size of the federal government?  No thanks!
• The slippery slope of racial profiling – Obama’s position is that racial profiling is wrong – in all cases.  In general I totally agree.  Nobody should be unfairly treated because of race.  BUT, it is a FACT that only Arabic males were involved in the 9/11 attack on the United States.  Doesn’t it make sense that people matching that profile would be “more suspect” in additional screenings at airports?  I mean come on!  One of my friends was going through security at the airport and guess who was picked out for the “additional screening?”  A woman with two kids under 4, one of whom was throwing up at the time.  A nun.  And my friend, his wife, and his 3 kids.  Doesn’t wisdom tell us that it’s not wrong to use the facts of an issue to take appropriate precautions?  If it were white males over the age of 35 who were known to be terrorists (my racial profile), I’d gladly submit to extra screening on every flight I had to take – to ensure that our country and citizens are safe.  Absolute statements against racial profiling?  No thanks!
• Iraq withdrawal timelines - Obama opposed the Iraq war from the beginning.  I’m fine with that.  But beyond that he promises that within 16 months of becoming President, he will have all the troops out of Iraq.  Do you know what will happen then?  Most attacks and problems in Iraq will stop almost immediately.  The opposition will be biding their time, stock-piling weapons, building up infrastructure behind the scenes, so that the minute foreign troops are gone, they can overwhelm the weak Iraqi government and take over the country.  The situation would be worse than it is now, no doubt.  Announcing a timeline for withdrawal is not only a political ploy to get the vote of anti-war folks, but is also equal to saying, “O.K. enemy, in 16 months we are going to surrender and you can have free reign of the country.  Have fun!”  In his defense, Senator Obama says that he would be working hard with the Iraqi government to get it up to speed for the date of withdrawal.  But that process is one with many variables and can’t be limited to a timeline of any sort, because nobody can predict how that process will work itself out.  It’s naive to think it could be predicted.  Stated withdrawal timelines for Iraq?  No thanks!
• Diplomacy with Iran – I don’t WANT a war with Iran.  It would be horrible on many levels and probably very bad for our own country.  But we have to leave that card on the table with a regime like is present in Iran.  Senator Obama doesn’t want to even make that card available.  He believes that discussion and sanctions can deter what is a truly maniacal regime in Iran.  Does anyone remember the Iran hostage crisis?  The philosophy and people in charge then are the same as today.  They have the same Anti-American agenda.  They deny the Holocaust ever happened.  They have vowed to wipe Israel off the map.  They have repeatedly referred to our country as their enemies, the “Great Satan.”  They were duplicitous then and are duplicitous now.  Hey Iran, fool the U.S. once, shame on the U.S.  Fool the U.S. again, shame on Obama.  Work for a trustworthy relationship with Iran?  No thanks!
• Undefined position on the family – I may be guilty of not digging deeply enough to find Senator Obama’s position on the traditional family, but I don’t think so.  I couldn’t find anything on his website or “blueprint” that says if he supports marriage being as traditionally defined – “one man and one woman” or if he supports “gay marriage.”  I’m sure he has said at some point, but I have not found it.  I suspect I know the answer, but since I don’t I’ll refrain from speculating.  Regardless, if it’s not important enough to him to state clearly, then I have to assume that he doesn’t take the issue seriously enough.  No statement on the traditional famly?  No thanks!