To Raise or Not to Raise?: The Ultimate Question

Enough with the finger-pointing. This economic bailout comes with a clear opportunity for McCain to make a strong case for his presidency. He dropped the ball by not going into the Debate fighting for the Republicans' plan, which seeks to require businesses themselves to pay back the money through loans and insurance premiums. This is common sense at its best. Does this equation make sense anywhere else in the real world? Of course not! No one likes paying for something they didn't order. "Excuse me, those people at the table across the way didn't bring money to pay for their meal and requsted that it be put on your tab," or "Sorry, sir, this man decided he wanted a big screen TV, but now he doesn't have the money for his leather sofa. We decided the fairest way for him to get it is if you paid for it instead." This argument makes no sense! Obama favors the $700 billion coming straight from OUR pockets, people who had no culpability in the matter to begin with, and McCain went meekly along in the hopes that the bill would pass and he would have at least done something.

In order for McCain to get back on track, he needs to explain to people how taxes work, and not stop explaining until the day of the election. I'm not an economist, but let's think this out sensibly. When you raise taxes, on anybody, rich or poor, there will obviously be less money circling through our economy because it's now in the government's pocket. Less money means less jobs up for grabs and less money to invest in starting up new businesses. Obama argues that the rich should pay more in taxes just because they make more, and this will help the economy. OK, you can argue that, but give some proof to back up your theory. When you raise taxes on the rich, you are once again giving them less money to work with. They can't create as many jobs for hard-working Americans to fill. They can't invest their money and make it grow which also creates jobs. They can't give as much to charities or simply spend more, which would boost the economy. Everybody loses when you overtax the rich. Raising taxes is probably the LEAST common-sense idea for the situation we are in now. When taxes were increased in the early 1930's, it made the Great Depression even worse. When Bush Sr. increased taxes in 1990, it led to the recession of 1991. Obama said during the primaries that he would double the capital gains tax, the tax on investments. If you do that, investors both big and small will find another country to invest in. Jobs will be lost. How is that looking out for the American people? McCain, who wants to lower it, will allow more jobs to be created by keeping more of the United States' money in the United States.
If you dig just a little, you'll see there is little sense in in the Democrat's plan. Democrats have been running for years now on entitlement programs that are paid for by our hard-earned dollars. Obama couldn't name a single program he would put on hold to deal with this crisis, so that implies that he'd still try to go along with them all, which in turn means RAISING TAXES. Raising taxes at a time like this will only worsen the situation. Is that the change we really want?

"I'm Kim Jong Il and I approve this message"

Question: Are all anti-American dictators really Democrats?
Answer: Looks like it.

In terms of high-profile endorsements, Obama just might be winning. Of course, having an endorsement doesn't always help a man. Just look at Jeremiah Wright. I actually like endorsements for the fact that they can tell you a lot more about a cadidate's character and worldview than the candidate will ever tell you himself. So let's take a quick look at some of the props that Obama has received.

1. The Chosun Sinbo, the North Korean's Japanese newspaper of choice, had this to say: "We will see a better relationship between the U.S. and the Korean Peninsula with Obama, who sternly criticizes Bush and who would meet the leader of Chosun without pre-conditions, than with the “Bush clone” and scarecrow of the neocons McCain."

2. Fidel Castro called Obama "the most advanced candidate" in the race, according to the NY Times. “I feel no resentment towards him, for he is not responsible for the crimes perpetrated against Cuba and humanity,” Castro wrote. “Were I to defend him, I would do his adversaries an enormous favor.” Therefore, he's not defending him. Wait, what?

3. Ahmed Yousef, Hamas' top political adviser, spoke to WABC radio on Sunday, April 13th, 2008, saying, "We like Mr. Obama. We hope he will [win] the election." He continued. Obama is a "great man with great principle, and he has a vision to change America to make it in a position to lead the world community but not with domination and arrogance." And Hamas only wants to wipe Israel off the map.

4. The Columbian terrorist group, FARC, who still hold 3 Americans hostage, said in a Feb. 28 letter, that he (Raul Reyes, the chieftain) met "two gringos" who assured him "the new president of their country will be Obama and that they are interested in your compatriots. Obama will not support 'Plan Colombia' nor will he sign the TLC (Free Trade Agreement)."

Not that Obama really wants these endorsements, but it matters not. The damage is done. We know that those who hate America think it will go better for them if Obama is elected.

Common Sense Truth: Murdering is generally frowned upon in our society

This might be the most common sense truth of all: Most Americans don't believe we can kill another human being simply because their quality of life does not meet our standards of "quality". If we could, run and hide, because someone out there knows you to be flawed and not living to your fullest potential. If you were allowed to kill people who you personally don't believe to have "potential", pretty soon we'd be wiping out whole segments of the population. Nazi Holocaust, anyone?
So I find it surprising that when the majority of the country feels so strongly on this issue, there is one presidential candidate who doesn't seem to have a problem with the whole "murder" thing. In 2003, Barack Obama voted "no" on a bill called the "Illinois Born Alive Infant Protection Act". Among other things, "the bill additionally provides that a live child born as a result of an abortion shall be fully recognized as a human person and accorded immediate protection under the law."
Senator Obama, the only Senator to argue this bill on the Senate floor, did a poor job of doing so by throwing in "constitutionality" where there clearly was no question of it. His most telling argument was this: "Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a, a child, a nine-month-old, child that was delivered to term."
Senator O'Malley answered, "This is essentially very simply. The Constitution does NOT say that a child born must be viable in order to live and be accorded the rights of citizenship. It simply says it must be born. And a child who survives birth is a U.S. citizen, and we need to do everything we can here in the State of Illinios and, frankly, in the other 49 states and in the halls of Washington, D.C., to make sure we secure and protect those rights. So if this legislation is designed to clarify, resecure and reaffirm the rights that are entitled to a child born in America, so be it, and it is constitutional."
Obama voted "no" on this bill, a bill that was identical to the one passed in the U.S. Senate, a bill that was even supported by liberal senators Barbara Boxer and Ted Kennedy. If that is not troubling enough, Obama knows that this could very well cause voters concern over his judgment and has issued an ad calling these facts a "lie." Senator Obama is the liar. Only problem for Obama is, Americans don't need the dishonest media or his own dishonest "Fact Check" site. We can do our own research, and what we find is frightening. We have a presidential nominee with a record of supporting infanticide. Watch out, America! I hope you're viable enough for Obama.

http://www.bornalivetruth.com/
http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST040402.pdf Pgs. 33 and following
http://www.ilga.gov/senate/transcripts/strans92/ST033001.pdf Pgs. 83 and following

Common Sense Truths

". . . governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends [of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness], it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness."

- The Declaration of Independence

We are not divided like some want you to think. The media tends to paint a picture of Red America versus Blue America. Actually, about 85% of our country is red-white-and-blue like our forefathers. The outspoken fringe on the left accounts for only 15%. Divisions of thought in our country are not a real problem at all. We were founded on the principle of freedom, that every voice matters. The real problem is the elite media-network news, cable news, newspapers, gossip magazines-who are consistently biased and skewed to the left. Every day they stray farther and farther from the true thoughts and beliefs of the majority of their countrymen. Even worse, they claim to represent the views of the majority and are quick to silence any opposition with unfounded malarchy. Unfortunately, these outlets hold a tremendous amount of influence over average, hard-working Americans who accept it as hard news.

According to "American Solutions", a website sponsored by former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich:
73% of us support drilling for oil off America's coasts
79% of us believe that it's impossible to negotiate with terrorist groups like al Qaeda
87% of us support making English the official language of the U.S.
94% would like a moment of silence for kids to be able to pray in public schools
93% of us see that al Qaeda poses a major threat to our country
80% of us think that the Social Security system is broken, and
65% of us support building more nuclear power plants to cut our carbon emissions

Let's put aside partisanship and bring any and all common sense ideas to the table. The Founders themselves knew that government could become destructive, and gave us the right to alter or abolish it. We don't have to be destructive, but we can be decisive, and work together using every ounce of common sense we possess to start making government work for the people again.