Why all the hoopla over Obama's inauguration?

Obama doesn’t care about freedom - not yours as an American, and certainly not that of foreigners. He is neither benevolent or enlightened. So what’s to celebrate?

The hopeful image of a United States with a president who cares about peace and justice has served its purpose - it got him elected.

The American people, in looking for their own “benevolent dictator,” don’t trust themselves. In choosing Obama they’ve said they’d rather the government take their money since it will better know how to spend it for them. And take it he will. In George Stephanopoulos’ Jan. 10, 2009 interview with him, Obama said, “Everybody’s going to have to give. Everybody’s going to have to have some skin in the game,” to achieve his goals.

He wraps himself in the flag and wants to present an image as if caring about the Constitution and the law, but like his predecessor it’s just lip-service. He’ll continue his grandiose talk, make a few symbolic, more than anything else, gestures to appear as if he values freedom upon entering office, and proceed to make things worse.

Not because the new president changes any of the longstanding policies of the federal government, but precisely because he continues them with a fervor. Massive government spending, as bad as it is, will increase. Assuming a nonexistent prerogative to intrude into people’s personal and economic lives will increase. Persecution and murder (which I define as unjustified killing) of other people worldwide will continue.

For someone who taught constitutional law, his massive plans for government control of many areas of our lives shows he doesn’t either understand or flat out doesn’t respect the fundamental purpose of our Constitution - to limit the power of the federal government. Obviously unrestrained by that, Obama’s plans will result in denial of rights, more debt, and a government without any limit to the areas in which it will intrude. I don’t see any plans mentioned to curtail the powers Bush allocated for himself and the office of presidency. In other words, no meaningful change on the horizon.

With Obama, America will suffer under more big government - big government spending and control. The many crises will exacerbate as the nation caves in from expansion of the government policies which created the crises in the first place.

As far as I can see, there’s not one issue on which Obama is for freedom.

Cuba for example. Lifting of travel sanctions and easing of others sounds favorable. But why stop there if freedom were actually your guiding principle? Such promises, if acted upon, are part of a greater plan to yet force Cuba to become what the US government wants it to be. Different tactics - same agenda. One who valued freedom would end the embargo upon entering office. To place demands (no matter how good they sound such as freeing of political prisoners, free elections, etc.) is to again exert pressure so the US might attain what it wants. But “might” doesn’t make “right.” Sovereign nations should operate as they choose, and the U.S. should simply leave them alone. But, of course, when it served him he claimed he wanted to end the embargo (video from 2004), but now as president he’s going to maintain current U.S. policy.

As for education, Obama states, “We’ll keep our promise to every young American–if you commit to serving your community and your country, we will make sure you can afford a college education.” “If you commit to serving,”? That’s right, 100 hours of “public service” would “give” you a $4,000 tax credit for college tuition. Mandatory “service” in exchange for a “tax credit” is not freedom. And neither is economic favoritism based upon career choice such as “this pledge: If you commit your life to teaching, America will pay for your college education.” Obama has yet another of his long lists of all his plans for education, but none address the core problem which is public education itself. I’d also note that a free society educates itself by practicing free speech - yet another area which may be threatened under an Obama White House.

Foreign policy is a big one for Obama. Or shall we say interventionism is a big one with his enormous (doubling) of foreign aid, continued death and maiming of innocents worldwide by our troops in areas of the world we have no business being in. Frankly, I haven’t any clue as to how so many “peace activists” supported this man whose stances are anything but peaceful. Obama, like past presidents, intends to use the “carrot” of foreign aid to get leverage in other nations essentially forcing them to cooperate with his agenda or else they’ll reap a beating with the stick of US military and economic might. It doesn’t matter what nation we’re considering, be it Israel, Pakistan, Cuba…Obama intends to offer rewards for compliance with US government agenda and withhold them (or worse) if he doesn’t get what he wants. Sadly, many more innocent civilians, as in Afghanistan, will die because of Obama’s “foreign policy.” Obama will do nothing to change our government’s imperialistic policies.

There will be no end in sight for “The War on Terror.” He’ll exploit the 9/11 tragedy just as Bush/Cheney did. Count on more “emergencies” or “crises” emphasized which Obama will request you put your trust in him and his administration.

Think he cares for political prisoners and detainees? No. Just another of the hot issues he used to try and make himself appear as if he cares about peace and justice. He has made some statements which if implemented would be good (remarks against torture and camps such as Guantánamo), but I do not trust him. Already back peddling on Guantánamo, I see no real “justice” for them occurring and certainly not for all the others unjustly held worldwide, without due process, in prisons for the US government. It is yet another example which garners people’s praise and hope, and he exploits it well. If Obama truly believed in justice, and wasn’t just using Guantánamo to political advantage, he would be adding his voice and support to the criminal investigation of and prosecution of any in the previous administration - from Bush down - who may be guilty of federal crimes.

Obama in his April 23, 2007 speech to the Chicago Council on Global Affairs:
“We must lead by building a 21st century military to ensure the security of our people and advance the security of all people…the ability to put boots on the ground will be critical in eliminating the shadowy terrorist networks we now face…how America’s larger purpose in the world is to promote the spread of freedom – that it is the yearning of all who live in the shadow of tyranny and despair. I agree….it’s about showing the world that America stands for something – that we can still lead.” Translation: continued interventionism worldwide.

His foreign policy is similar to what he intends to do domestically. Obey and receive his rewards, refuse and things you’ve earned and deserve will be withheld. “Service” is a twisted concept when Obama and his chief of staff speak of it. Who among us would equate compulsory work for the government with volunteering? One way or another, Obama appears intent on bringing back the draft, he just wants to avoid using the terms such as conscription. Look at his extensive “service” programs including “high school students should be expected to engage in community service for 50 hours annually during the school year or summer months.” Withholding and denying formal recognition of one’s education which they’ve achieved (diploma for example) unless they “serve” the government isn’t freedom. Who knows what else Obama will devise in order to force from American citizens to “serve” the government.

Obama is a gun control proponent but like many politicians plays both sides acting like he believes in the U.S. Constitution while simultaneously and in the same breath justifying anti-Constitutional anti-freedom positions. Obama, “ As a general principle, I believe that the Constitution confers an individual right to bear arms. But just because you have an individual right does not mean that the state or local government can’t constrain the exercise of that right, in the same way that we have a right to private property but local governments can establish zoning ordinances that determine how you can use it.” Well, the 2nd amendment of our Constitution is much more than a “general principle,” and while it provides for personal protection and recreational uses, it is in the Constitution because it was considered the people’s last refuge against tyranny.

Economically? It should seem obvious and go without saying that there’s no way our economy can withstand Obama’s big spending. His massive government programs alone, not to mention his “economic stimulus” and “bailout” plans, aren’t paid for out of thin air. It’s not his job to “create jobs” or to invest in any industry such as alternative fuels. The “free” market will likely be even more burdened with more regulation and taxation, with all manner of other economic interventionism effectively eliminating any chance of a free market emerging which could actually help our economy. His multiple federal rescues, from healthcare (”I’ve said is that I believe we can have universal health care in this country by the end of the next president’s first term. By the end of my first term as president of the United States of America.“[before Planned Parenthood Action Fund] to education to plans to address “global climate change,” will weaken this nation to the core. To increase taxation on one group to fund giveaway programs for others is not only immoral and unjust, it will harm the economy. Wealth doesn’t come from government, only thievery and enslavement.

Social Security is yet another area where words meant to comfort and alleviate the fears of the American people are used. To “ensure,” “strengthen,” “protect,” “expand,” and to “reform”. Rather than “reform” why not allow Americans to have the freedom to keep their money and take care of themselves?

Or take social issues which the federal government shouldn’t be involved in whatsoever. For instance, on the drug war there’s no telling what Obama really thinks. Now, it appears Obama doesn’t really oppose the drug war, he just thinks he can do it better with more government programs meant to reduce drug dependency. Freedom would mean an end to the horrors of the drug war entirely. Or another social issue, abortion, since Obama views a baby as punishment (clip of Obama discussing if his unwed daughters got pregnant and were “punished with a baby“) it seems he thinks everyone has a right to be bailed out of such a situation (with taxpayer money through his universal healthcare perhaps?). I recall his “Well, the first thing I’d do as president is, is sign the Freedom of Choice Act.” (federal legislation eliminating all state laws regarding abortion) told to the Planned Parenthood Action Fund. Obama, in the same speech referred to himself as teaching “Constitutional Law” but somehow he always seems to forget about Tenth Amendment.

Those are but a few issues, indicative of Obama’s mindset and what’s in store for the nation and world. No change just more government interventionism at every level. And a McCain administration would have essentially been no different (it may have had differing focuses but the result would be the same because the premise is the same.)

Despite appearances, I think the American people will one day return to individualism, independence, self-reliance and choose to be free from the oppression of the big government policies politicians such as Obama and McCain support. Americans will remove their blinders, see what hasn’t worked, and no more place foolish trust in fine rhetoric, campaign slogans, and promises from candidates whose goal is maintain an imperialistic agenda abroad and a centrally planned economy domestically. They’ll grow weary of suffering from the heavy hand of government and its oppression, learning from their lack of liberty to finally appreciate and crave it.

Rejecting both the warfare and welfare state and anyone who advocates its continuance, they’ll choose liberty. That will be historic and celebratory.

Then the change we need will occur.

Christine Smith is a freelance writer and political activist from Colorado. She has written numerous articles for state, national and international publications (newspapers, magazines, online publications) covering a wide range of topics: the arts, technology, business, politics, health, environment, social justice, human spirituality, and profile interviews with high achievers. Articles by Christine Smith at MWC News http://mwcnews.net/ChristineSmith

Recommend this article...

Did you enjoy this article? Please bookmark it onto:

Be first to comment this article

Write Comment

Please keep the topic of messages relevant to the subject of the article. Personal verbal attacks will be deleted. Please don't use comments to plug your web site. Such material will be removed. Just ensure to *Refresh* your browser for a new security code to be displayed prior to clicking on the 'Send' button. Keep in mind that the above process only applies if you simply entered the wrong security code.
Name:
E-mail
Homepage
Title:
BBCode:
Comment:
Code:*
	I wish to be contacted by email regarding additional comments

Powered by AkoComment Tweaked Special Edition v.1.4.4