OK. I gave (give) Obama an F. Let me state up front: both parties are incompetent fools, in my opinion; neither one much better than the other.
But... The government of this country under this man is an abject failure of divisiveness, arrogance, cronyism, and sheer incompetence. Where is the leadership? Where are the concrete, meaningful ideas? His utter lack of experience in real-world leadership of getting things done shows in his handling of many issues and in his relations with the Republicans. (to the earlier poster, GW Bush had far more practical governmental experience than Obama from both his family background and his time as governor, not to mention business experience Obama? A couple of unproductive years in the Illinois senate and even less in the US senate. But frankly, I don't necessarily believe governmental experience is truly critical to do the job.) His ideological pursuit big government at any cost will destroy this country if allowed to go unchecked - and notice, aside from his desire to punish and steal from the successful, he is a big fan of governmental secrecy
and intrusive, strong-arm governmental tactics; a very, very dangerous combination. Summary: just another dirty Chicago politician and not even as competent as Daly (1st or 2nd). Hillary was
such a better choice...
Let's pick one example. Taxes. There is no "fair share": is is NOT a moral issue.:hairpull: The government has no right to claim the fruits of my labor: it is mine, and mine alone, and I know best how to spend, save, or invest it. If you are poor, it is not my fault (let see, did you stay in school, for one?) which is not to say I am unwilling to help. Yes, some government is necessary, but not much, frankly. Everyone is in favor of roads, schools, research, education, parks, clean air, etc, etc, etc. (Personally, I think we should all have a mansion and a Ferrari) But we cannot pay for it all.:bang: Period. The issue is what government is necessary, and how do we pay for it, not fairness. It is not "fair" to take more (percentage) of one person's (money) income than another's just because they make more: a flat tax of, say 10%, makes higher earners pay more by definition than lower earners. Taking an increasing share (%) is punitive and disincentivizing. You say it "hurts" you more to give that dollar? So, you just want to take out your situation on some one else then? Everyone should suffer because of you? Everyone pays for the government or no one, in my opinion: if you make a million, you'll pay $1K, if you make $10, you'll pay a buck. No exemptions, no deductions, no excuses for anyone. If taxes go up, everyone's taxes go up. It's just so, so easy to raise taxes on the other guy, isn't it - raise taxes on your own damn self. (I say lets mandate that no Hollywood actor/actress can keep more than 100K (and maybe this should go for Democrats, too), and Warren Buffett must surrender every penny of his money to the government.) Government is not "free", people, the money has to come from somewhere. Government does not produce anything, it does not earn money (just prints it). Further, whoever pays the bills has the final say, so the more money you give the government, the more the government gets to tell you what to do and how to do it. Great stuff, if you can't figure out how to survive and live life on your own... I guess Obama would like to be like the Cubans and the Chinese, and the Russians, etc - let's make everyone poor - that's fair. Oh, I forgot, the politicians get to be rich and powerful; you will still be poor, however.
There are so, so many things with this man, I don't even know where to begin...
