09 April 2008

Why Obama Can't and Won't Win


If anyone were to take a look at the news coverage of the 2000 Elections, everyone was in agreement, Gore would win. To everyone's amazement, or at least anyone along either coastline of the U.S., Bush won the White House. Of course, there were the calls that Bush "stole" the election and all of that noise, or that Ralph Nader cost Gore the election, but wasn't Gore supposed to win by a wide margin, wasn't he supposed to win with a Reagan Style landslide? It didn't happen that way mostly because of the "Red States" along America's Beltway. Regions of the U.S. mostly ignored by your average Pundit and News Anchor, all voted for Bush. Keep in mind that the only states that voted for Gore, were most of the northern Midwest, the West Coast and except for New Hampshire, the Northeast, only 18 states and DC! Everyone else, 32 States, voted for Bush.

Fast forward to 2004, and again. No way that the "Moron" Bush could win. He's up against the "Intellectual" John Kerry, a man who's "Infinitely Smarter than Bush", polls were showing that Kerry was leading 47% to 44%, only 44% felt that the country was going in the right direction, 43% said that Bush should be re-elected and 51% wanted someone new. So what happened, again the Democrats lost.

So now here we are, 2008 and it's time for a new Election. Again, CNN and the rest of the Left Leaning Media are proclaiming that a Democrat will win, most likely Obama, since Obama leads and has most of the votes he needs to win. Unless of course Clinton can figure out a way to "steal" the election, at which point this article would be moot. But I don't think that's going to happen. The outrage in the democrat party, especially amongst the Blacks would be unbelievably intense. Obama will be the Democratic Candidate led to defeat at the hands of McCain. Why? It's simple, if my domain name hasn't hit you yet, NoSocialism.com.

When Americans are polled about whether they like the direction of the Administration, they're not given the choice to say specifically what it is that they don't like. The Pollsters assume that American's are dissatisfied with the same things that they themselves are dissatisfied with, but especially in the Heartland of America, nothing is further from the truth. So let me give you a clue as to what it is that Americans in the heartland worry about. Between the years of 2001 through 2005, Inflation went up by 12%, an average of around 3% a year. As for the Government, let's take a look at some numbers from the OMB:
  • Science, Space & Technology; up 21%
  • Department of Transportation; up 24%
  • Unemployment Benefits; 26%
  • General Government Spending; 32%
  • Social Security & Related Programs; 39%
  • Health Care Spending; 42%
  • Community Programs; 71%
  • Housing & Commerce; 86%
  • International Affairs; 94%
  • Education Department; 99%
This is a "Government Gone Wild" and it's only gotten worse since 2005. Social Security and related programs last year alone almost matched the increases between 2001 through 2005! I didn't even include increases in Military spending, because obviously with the war going on, it's a necessary expense and the only thing of this list here that is a constitutional requirement. These are the things that the Heartland is worried about, so what is Obama's response to this, absolutely nothing. He wants to increase spending not decrease it. He wants expanded government, not a government that's more limited. John McCain has a huge advantage here since, according to Pig Book, Hillary Clinton has inserted 281 individual projects totaling 296.2 Million bucks! Big Spender Obama wasn't quite as lavish, inserting 53 pet projects totaling over 97 Million a huge amount for a Jr. Senator. John McCain should be given a Medal for keeping his hands out of the cookie jar, he's the only one of the candidates with no pet projects and 1 out of only 4 senators with no pork barrel spending.

Spending is not the only reason why Obama will lose, but I think it highlights the differences between Obama and McCain and why Americans will choose a more responsible legislator, over someone who simply talks a good game. The biggest mistake that Democrats make is that they think they can win by Lying, by playing games, by grandstanding and other dishonest tactics. These things might work in NY, they might work in Chicago, they might work in San Fransisco, but they sure as heck don't work in America's Heartland where American's don't listen to CNN and MSNBC as if it were God's Gospel truth. In the 2000 election, did Gore really think that we didn't take "Fair Trade" to mean protectionism? Did he really think that voters didn't realize how expensive his Health care reforms would be? Did he think that Americans wanted to grant our sovereignty to World Governments via the Kyoto protocol? When it was Kerry's turn, again the lying. Did he really think we'd buy the "I voted for it before I voted against it"? How stupid did he think we were. Did he really think we wouldn't look at all the video's where he kept saying over and over that we needed to invade Iraq, but when the election came around, he disavowed everything he said. Did he really think we wouldn't look into it.

And now we have Obama. While not as easy to beat as Clinton, let's face it every time she opens her mouth, it's to expand government even more, but does Obama really think that people will believe that he didn't know what his pastor has been saying for the past 20 years? Does he think that we're so dimwitted that we don't know that all of these government programs he's proposing will have to be paid for out of our own pockets? As the Heartland continues to prosper with ever increasing exports to China and India of food and heavy manufacturing equipment, does he think that his protectionist rhetoric will sit well with them?

The Heartland of America believes in Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Obama believes in Abortion, Regulation and as Rush Limbaugh often says, "When was the last time you saw a happy Liberal... They're always complaining about how bad things are, even in Boom times!"

The Heartland of America believes in "Pull yourself up from the bootstraps". They believe in Patriotism. They believe in smaller government. They believe in equality. They believe that America is the GREATEST country in the world, and Obama doesn't believe any of these things. From Michelle's comments about this being the first time she's proud of America, to Obama's book outlining how he used to count the Marxist professors as friends to Obama's minister speaking of "Evil America" and the US of KKK A. These are things that don't sit well with Middle America, and unlike the major coastal cities, Middle America doesn't let CNN and MSNBC tell them How to vote.

Obama won't lose because America is Racist, on my street alone, (and I live in a fairly wealthy subdivision) at least 4 of my neighbors are biracial couples, and that's only counting the Marriages between Black's and Whites, it doesn't include the Asian / White couples, Asian /Hispanic couple, Jewish /Hispanic couples, so on and so forth. Keep in mind that my street is only 2 blocks long. I would go as far as to say that anywhere from a third to half of all my neighbors are of mixed backgrounds, this is no longer a big deal in America. By and large people no longer have the racist attitudes that their parents or grandparents had. I live in South Florida, and so we may be a bit more of a melting pot than the rest of the country, but I've been around enough to realize that most of the rest of America is just as tolerant as we are here.

No, the only reason that Obama will lose is because of his Socialist and Marxist policies that are totally at odds with core American Values. The sooner the Democrats realize this, the sooner they can put down their hateful name calling, their villainization of America, the villainization of the President and the Republican Party. Then and only then can the Democrats actually work together with us to build a stronger America that all Citizens will be proud to call home.

06 April 2008

Protesters try to douse Olympic Flame in London

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Protesters angry over China's human rights record and its recent actions in Tibet scuffled with police and made attempts to grab the Olympic torch and douse it with a fire extinguisher on Sunday.

art.protest.desai.irpt.jpg

Reema Desai of Orlando, Florida, captured this image of the protests at the torch relay.

Here in the United States of America, we should be outraged. We stand for Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness, and yet we are the primary source of income for China. We are the ones that are putting the guns, hardware and technology into the hands of the Chinese to continue their repressive rule. Yes, it would hurt our economy to impose sanctions on the Chinese, but how else would they learn? The worst part is, the world community has even given them the Olympics!

After Tienanmen Square, we should have imposed sanctions until basic human rights issues had been resolved. Back then it would have been a relatively painless exercise, because we didn't rely on China for all that much in terms of Goods and Services. Now however with China importing almost a Trillion a year, and exporting over 1.2 Trillion a year, of which almost 233 Billion of that trade hitting U.S. Shore's the economic impact of an embargo today would be near catastrophic. Since Europe's Bi-Lateral trade with China exceeds 300 Billion, they're even more defendant on the cheap goods they provide, so of course, they won't do anything about it either. Unfortunately, this is one of those situations where only time will tell what the impact of our inaction becomes. Given China's 5000 year history of subduing their enemies, I don't think the outcome will be a good one.

05 April 2008

Some Superdelegates More Super Than Rest


These prominent Democrats can name additional super delegates, giving them control over multiple convention votes, and that could be the difference in a race that may not be decided until the August convention.It just goes to show you the complete disdain that the Democrats have for their own voters, in that they don't trust them to make "proper" decisions. They basically rigged the system to where they could change the outcome of any race to suit their own needs.

read more | digg story

04 April 2008

World Bank accused of climate change "hijack"



The above video was released a while ago, well today, it's starting to show that it's all true. The following story shows how Developing countries and environmental groups accused the World Bank on Friday of trying to seize control of the billions of dollars of aid that will be used to tackle climate change in the next four decades.

It just goes to show you what these people were REALLY all about, it was about getting the cash in their pockets and nothing more.

read more digg story

Our Sponsors