Welcome, Добро пожаловать, Welkom, Bienvenue, Bienvenido, 歓迎, υποδοχή

This site is dedicated to believers in real Democracy. It is heavily influenced by the Judeo-Christian value system. You can leave an anonymous comment if you feel the need. All comments are moderated and will be answered. No requirements are needed.If you want to discuss issues that deal with the Christian life then click http://ideasoftimreligion.blogspot.com/. If you want to study Biblical issues click http://ideasoftimbible.blogspot.com/. Please stick around, follow the polls and leave agreement/ disagreement points under each Paper.

November 5, 2010

#69 Referendum

It doesn't matter what all the pundits at MSNBC think, this election was all about referendum.  It was aimed at all the types of policies this administration has had:
  1. President Obama's "hope" and "change" policies.  These did not turn out the way those promises were laid out to the people.  Imagine that, a Democratic president lying to get votes.  Even his wife had to take a step back and tell the people these things aren't coming fast enough.  But what was the rationalization behind it?  Did they actually say, "well, we didn't realize we were in over our heads"?  Of course not; they now claim they never meant the change would be fast.  But isn't that what promises are for?  Isn't that what people wanted?  Now all they are left with is the hope.  But the hope now is that he will not be reelected.
  2. President Obama's foreign policies.  We tried to be nice to Islamic extremists by changing the name of the war. We tried to smooth over relations with Muslim nations by saying we aren't a Christian nation.  We tried to buddy up to European allies by saying we are too arrogant of a people.  We tried to show respect to cultures by bowing to every leader out there.  We tried to be closer to Mexico by suing the state of Arizona for trying to protect its borders from gang wars.  What did all of this get us?  More threats, bombs on planes, and no better looking in the eyes of the world than when he first started.  Now of course all the "we" you see above actually means "he", but since he is chief of state and a symbol our our nation, it has to translate into "we".  Therefore "we" get punished for his ideas.
  3. President Obama's domestic policies.  Trying to fool the people that he gave us all tax breaks when he didn't.  Sure, most people got $20-30 extra a paycheck in 2009 starting in April.  But two things people need to know about this.  One, how far will $20 get you a week?  An extra trip to McDonald's to get the family value meals?  Or one half tank of gas?  And two, the tax code changed that year and most people were paying higher federal taxes at the end of the year.  So in essence we paid more.  The Bush tax cuts were real.  We all got $600-1200 back in one lump sum with no higher taxes at the end of the year.  And what did Obama do?  He tried to repeal them and roll all of them back claiming they only helped the rich.  Repealing Bush's policies on abortion and stem cell research.  And of course the big one, the health care forced down our throats without any compromise or care for what the average citizen wants.
  4. President Obama's military policies.  Trying to close Guantanamo Bay and bring the terrorists that tried to kill all of us onto our own soil so they could have a better chance of accomplishing their feat.  Repealing don't ask, don't tell.  Homosexuals serving?  So what!  But that opens the door for ridicule and may even hurt some of our soldiers who are already serving.  Firing one of the head military leaders in Afghanistan for having an opinion.
  5. President Obama's minions.  The leaders:  Joe, Nancy, Harry, Bawney, Al, Rahm, and Robert and the late Teddy.  The Followers: Charlie, Barbara, another Al, and another Robert (now deceased).  Notice oddly enough the name Hilary did not show up on this list.  Out of all the ones whom he surrounded himself with, Hilary was lesser of all evils and almost looked middle-ground.
The GOP won handily and although it may not be due to what they stand for it definitely was due to what they stand up against.  And some liberals claim this election was not a referendum on their policies.  Even the master of disaster thinks it was something else
 http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/11/05/obama_policies_were_not_rejected_on_election_day.html. Well, if it was not a referendum then what was it?  Stop rationalizing.

9 comments:

David said...

On election day, the president was even on TV and making appearances, stating in so many words, "We need to get the word out that people don't know how important their vote is, and they need to get out and vote!"

It appears to any honest eyes looking at the election results that the president was wrong...and right. People DID know the importance...and they WERE getting out to vote.

hawkssong68 said...

Wow. You're right. You could use some other opinions here. They do seem a little one-sided. Fortunately (or perhaps unfortunately--yet to be seen), most of my comments will be tempered with my love for you. If you were anyone else...well. You know me. Just do me one favor. Actually look up the word Liberalism. I'll get back to you.

Gozreht said...

All comments and opinions are welcomed no matter what. I do moderate all comments. My guests should feel at ease and feel free to express themselves. Feelings can be expressed. Ideas can be challenged but personal attacks will not be published. So I am glad someone with a different view will speak here. I do get atheists every once in awhile but for some reason they do not stay.

Okay. Liberalism. The dictionary I have has three definitions. I will shorten them.
1) State of being liberal
2) Liberal views, especially in politics
3) Liberalizing movement in Protestantism

So I guess we have to go to find what "liberal" means. There are 10 definitions. I will again try and shorten them.
1) Expressing policies in favor of civil liberties and using government power to promote social progress
2) Having views that favor freedom of individuals to act in a manner of their own choosing
3) Political views
4) A characteristic form of government
5) Tolerant of ideas of others
6) Generous
7) Loose or approximate
8) Permissable (morally unstrained)
9) Liberal arts
10) A person with liberal ideas.

WHEW!!

Root word: Latin--free

I have no problem with any of those. But so you know where I stand so you can comment even more so others can learn from both of us: I feel the original term is, in essence, a great word. Let me explain this more by using another word I feel is good. Communism! I seriously say communism in its perfect state (equality, utopia) is fantastic. But somewhere along the way (Lenin, Stalin, etc.) the term took on a different meaning or should I say misinterpreted by these people. Equality was forced upon the people and many were killed. I think the term liberalism has deviated or expanded too far. Too much permissable actions can cause the wrong outcomes. Biblically speaking, Paul said everything is permissable but not everything is beneficial. Sure things can be done but does that mean they should?

How much freedom should we have? Take it to the extreme. Should I be free to murder someone? Should we be that liberal? I hope the answer is no. Well, if the answer is no then that means there is a point where it becomes "wrong". The problem is no one knows where the point is or is afraid to make a point. Liberalism in its full use of the word can not work. Does that mean tolerance should not happen? NO!!! But tolerance does not mean "one has to agree or like" something else. It just means accepting there is a difference.

Liberalism in history has always meant death for the average citizen. Take the French Revolution. Maximillian Robespierre was against the absolute monarch. Called himself a liberal and someone who believed in change and freedom. But in the end he made France go through what we call the Reign of Terror where thousands of people died for not believing the way he did. Stalin killed over 10 million people based on "left-winged" agendas-Marxism. China-5 million dead. Most of these men got be the leader by using promises of hope and change and then whe they became the leader used the government as a force ( defintion #1 liberal) and then the avergae citizen was in trouble.

Conservatives on the other hand are those who oppose change and stay with traditional values. Can this be taken to the extreme as well? Uh..yeah, Hitler, Mussolini (although these men were bent on change under the flag of conservatism), and they killed millions as well.

I am not an extreme conservative. I do have compassion on people. But I feel certain things should not be changed because once everything has changed, no moral standards are kept which means it's every person for themself---chaos. Society falls.

Thank you for your comment. I have been wanting and waiting for others to comment. Together we can all learn. That is why I am a teacher. Unless something catches my complete attention, you address something specifically to me or you ask my opinion, you can have the last word and your opinion will be protected by the great moderator. Me.

hawkssong68 said...

Just so you know, I prefer the term "Libtard" as coined by Glenn Beck! He has to be one of my favorite comedians. Well, I don't know if he's actually a comedian, but he does make me laugh.

Anything taken to the extreme can be bad. Pride. Envy. Greed. Lust. Gluttony. Wrath. Sloth. But enough about Republicans. Used correctly, (read: in moderation) even the seven deadlies can be put to "good" use. Taking "pride" in one's work. Using "envy" to work a little harder and give your family the things they need. Having just enough "greed" to not be a burden on the state. "Lust", well, that's obviously got its benefits! Being a little "gluttonous" around family and friends at the holidays never hurt anyone. "Wrath" often works hand in hand with justice. And "sloth" is just the body's way of saying, "Nah. I'm sleeping in today!"

Unfortunately, most human beings, including conservatives, can't stop at "good enough". Liberals, too. Er, uh....Libtards. We all want more than our share. So we push our agendas a little harder. In the case of the Libtards, we give out a little more, deserved or not. And in the case of conservatives, we take away a little more, deserved or not. BOTH ideals have been dragged through the mud and slung up against a fat hog to dry! No doubt about it.

Here's my main problem. And in all honesty, it's more a problem with my counterparts than with conservatives! In another post, you mentioned Bill O'Reilly (another funny guy!) on a popular talk show recently getting his feelings hurt when two Libtard (women!)walked out on him. Certainly, Bill has always been extremely pleasant and reasonable with his guests, right, right? What an uproar! All of a sudden, HIS opinion and HIS right to it were attacked! Let the stones fly. Conservatives rarely let anyone with differing opinions get a word in edgewise. Watch ANY interview with a conservative host and a liberal guest and the result is always the same. The host ends up coining phrases like, well, "libtard" and talking over the "guest" to the point that the Jerry Springer show seems somehow calm...

Basically, you're bullies. And liberals let you do it.

Now. Onto the actual post.

American voters are fickle. And most, if any, are not exactly well informed of the issues. Nor do they care. If they have money in the bank and things seem to be going well, they usually won't get off their butt to even go to the polls! But, any time the economy is bad, there they are, changing their minds, again. In record numbers. As a Clinton supporter once said "It's the economy, Stupid"!

Let's face it. A lot of people voted for Obama because he's black (as a liberal, I can say that). No one really paid attention to his stand on a lot of things. I certainly didn't want him. And I didn't vote for him, either. For the first time ever...I didn't vote. I might have voted for McCain, but....OMG! Sarah Palin? Really? Was that supposed to appease us Hillary supporters? I still have nightmares! Any way. If you believe that the American voters went in fully armed with the facts and the issues being raised, come over here and take some candy. But hey, if it makes you sleep better at night...

Until the economy straightens itself out (and that is what it will take), the voters will be going back and forth so fast, they'll look like Mom's ShakeWeight!

Claim a victory if you want. If the economy is still bad when Obama's time is up, you'll claim another one. But, my brother, please don't kid yourself into thinking it has anything to do with anything other than money.

And that's greed. And that's bad.

Hugs!

Gozreht said...

I am really not a Sarah Palin supporter by the way. I like her ideas for the most. But I do not think she is a great leader. I voted for McCain. My conscience told me vote third party. My hand didn't listen. Same result. With that said, Palin vs Biden?? Uh...Palin. Biden is a numbskull and doesn't even know when to shut up enough to support the man who gave him his job. But "numbskull" and "congress" are almost interchangeable. That is why no one from congress will ever be a great president nor have they ever been.

FANTASTIC POST.

I am answering this not to get the last word in but to show both sides of the issues.

The difference is both sides see the other as the "bully". You go to conservative groups and they all complain that liberals are the ones who talk too much and we let them get away with it. :)

All talk show hosts are comedians. It's all about the ratings not truth.

Perception is reality.

Final note: As long as the American people are hurting there is no victory!

hawkssong68 said...

Who said anything about Biden? Bleh! He's one of those VP's that's going to down in history. That's it. Just down.

It SCARES me that you like Palin's ideas! That's the worst part of her!

Perception is not reality. Reality is reality. It may influence reality for someone, but that doesn't make it so. Literally scratching my head trying to come up with one example of a Liberal screaming down a Conservative....even the Libtard women simply walked off the set....and then apologized! What?

Yeah. American people are losing. O'Bama and his predecessor Baby Bush are very out of touch with what's really going on as well as a majority, if not all, politicians. Look at them. Probably not a hard day's work between them. They don't know what it's like stretching paper paychecks or eating peanut butter sandwiches for months at a time.

Is there an answer? Probably. Will we see it? Not according to the Mayans :) Maybe that's not such a bad thing...

Gozreht said...

:)

hawkssong68 said...

If I had known you were going to put HIM on there, I never would have told you about the new blog editor! LOL!

UGH! I'm surrounded by Bush!

Gozreht said...

I made them book ends just for you.