Wednesday, 22 October 2008
|0831 - To the undecided voter|
foolscap001 points out a fantastic essay by Neal Boortz with that title. Go read the whole thing...it's full of gems like these:
One interesting point: If Barack Obama was applying for a security clearance as a government employee, these associations [Ayers, Wright, Rezko - JRM] would disqualify him. We are, my friends, about to have a president who doesn't qualify for a security clearance. Pretty pathetic. If Barack Obama becomes president, he would not even qualify to be his own bodyguard.
Not so the government. You have no choice as to whether or not you are going to be a customer of government. Your patronage is compelled and your payments are extracted at the point of a gun. Supreme Court Justice John Marshall said that "the power to tax is the power to destroy." The power to tax in the wrong hands can certainly bring destruction to our economy and even to our country. I submit to you that the power to tax in the hands of Barack Obama is dangerous: Dangerous to you personally, and dangerous to the very fabric of our Republic.
Taxes are a nasty little reality of life. Nobody wants anarchy. Government is a necessity. Government, though, is not supposed to create winners and losers. Government is not, as Obama intends, to be used as an instrument of plunder.
The WSJ reports that the National Federation of Independent Business says that only 10% of small businesses with one to nine employees will be hit by Obama's tax increase. However, almost 20% of the small businesses that employ from 10 to 19 people will get nailed, and 50% of small businesses with over 20 employees get punished. [I can guarantee that the small business I work for will get hammered. - JRM]
If Barack Obama gets those two nominations, and if the Democrat Senate rubber-stamps them, then we are going to have a Supreme Court making decisions based on their liberal definition of "fairness" with some consideration to foreign court decisions tossed in. This is perhaps Obama's greatest opportunity to do permanent damage to our Republic; permanent and irreparable damage. It's one thing when Barack Obama talks about wealth seizure and redistribution in terms of "fairness." It's quite another when that talk is legitimized by a Supreme Court decision.
There's much more. Please, go read the whole thing.
current mood: anxious
If Barack Obama was applying for a security clearance as a government employee, these associations [Ayers, Wright, Rezko - JRM] would disqualify him.
No, they wouldn't. Lying about them and trying to conceal them probably would, but the associations themselves wouldn't.
I agree that "fantastic" is a good description of the essay.
In the technical sense.