Statism/egalitarianism always
requires some to support others by force. How can you possibly consider that
moral?
Why do you accept his Keynesian
economic policies when Keynes' theory has continually been proven false? Or why
do you accept what sounds good over what works?
Why do you assume that
economic equality has anything to do with treating people equally? The former
is Marxist, the latter is American. And why do you assume that different rules
and standards apply to different people? Are we to be properly equal or not?
How far are you willing to go
in allowing Obama to sacrifice the more successful among us for the sake of the
unproductive? Is someone who stays unemployed in order to avoid work and to
cheat the government, or who gambles away his welfare check, worthy of our
compassion and justified in forcing us to sustain his unearned lifestyle?
Obama believes that
government needs to compete with private industry; but, in fact, private
industry alone produces goods and services that make an economy grow. Why don’t
you see that we cannot afford to have government compete and that there is
serious damage done by following his thesis?
On what basis do you assume that government stimulus of the
economy is better than private stimulus? You are replacing rational decision
makers with the irrational, those with risk in the game with those without risk
or incentive to be efficient.
Bush had a deficit around
$400B prior to TARP in 2008; and everyone including Obama supported TARP and
considered it a requirement. Obama has added over $5T in deficits/debt, all
optional. How can you say that Obama did not create his own economic mess?
The producers (particularly
the wealthy) in this country provide the jobs and government revenue to support
the moochers and looters. How can you possibly say they don’t pay their fair
share?
Why do you only care about the benefits government can provide you
today and not the heavy burdens your children and grandchildren will inherit
tomorrow?
Since you have accepted
politicians providing you benefits at others’ expense, how can you possibly
complain when they take from you to give to others - or themselves?
How can you have your cake
and let your neighbor eat it too?
If you have not contributed
to society, then why do you feel society owes you something at the expense of
the true contributors? If you have contributed yourself, then why do you feel
that those who have not deserve the fruits of others’ labor?
Why is one considered
“greedy” to want to keep what he earns, but "compassionate" when he
wants to take the earnings from one to give to others?
If you think we cannot afford
health care, then how in the world do you think we can afford ObamaCare with enormous
inefficiencies and an enormous government bureaucracy to administer it?
Does it bother you that science has verified that there has been zero
global warming for the last 16 years, and that there has not been any
concerning climate change in our lifetime; yet Obama’s entire energy and
ecology policies are based on that myth? And he plans for more damaging EPA
rules after the election.
Does it bother you that he has subsidized - with tax dollars - inefficient
“green” industries that have or will fail as the subsidies defy laws of
economics?
Do you approve of the cronyism that is associated with such
policies? (It is certainly not capitalism that leads to that.)
Do you like the high gas prices resulting from Obama’s energy
policies? How can you complain about the prices without understanding the
cause?
Aren’t you a bit concerned that Obama strongly fights bullying –
children taking things from others by force, yet he constantly bullies all of
us with his statist/egalitarian policies?
You are for the collective over the individual. But why aren’t you
concerned about government controls over the individual? Why are you more
supportive of statism than capitalism that leaves individuals free? There are
no collective rights.
Obama said he would end all
military conflicts early in his term. Yet he escalated Afganistan and contributed
to the crises in Egypt, Syria and Libya. He created the greatest conflict in
the M.E. by sympathizing with Muslims, has accomplished nothing with Iran - our
greatest concern, and has constantly rebuffed Israel - our only ally there. He has
refused to recognize our real enemy. How can you possibly say his foreign
policy is a success? How can you naively believe that killing bin Laden
decimated Al Queda or that “leading from behind” has been a successful
strategy? How can you accept his lies about M.E. events? Radical Islam has
hijacked the “Arab Spring” and he cannot face it - so he lies about it.
Obama said he was “offended”
at the suggestion that his administration would attempt to deceive the public
about the Benghazi attack (which he in fact did). After all the lies he has
told, what is there that you can really believe he has not deceived us
about? Certainly nothing dealing with foreign policy, ObamaCare, deficits,
“green” energy, executive orders, etc. But that’s what nihilists do - have to
do.
Do you really believe he
should be considered a hero for having bin Laden killed, when in fact Bush laid
the groundwork for capture and any President would find it his duty to approve
of the killing? Do you not find it arrogant of him to take all credit and to
act like that made his foreign policy a success?
Why is it okay for unions and other public institutions to influence
votes for the Left, but not for churches to tell their members which candidate
agrees with their values?
Does it matter that Obama has
no 2nd term agenda? That, by default, we will see a continuation of
high deficits, slow growth, foreign policy weakness leading to increased
terrorism, etc.?
If someone does not accept
your political views, how can you assume he does not care about the people you
claim to want to help? And if someone disagrees with Obama, why do you assume
he is a racist?
Does it bother you that Obama is conducting the most negative
campaign in our history? That he says it is detestable to attack personal
character, yet he has frequently attacked Romney’s character and called him a
liar - without any justification? Why can’t you recognize the contrasting
honesty of Romney?
Could anything convince you that Obama is a danger to this
once-free country?
The best book you could read is Atlas Shrugged: Rand defines the likes of Obama
very clearly; and
you will be able to see why America will likely “shrug” more than it has with a
2nd Obama term.
No comments:
Post a Comment