Obama hates the US Constitution

Americans reject socialism. Americans revere and truly love the United States Constitution, which subordinates society to the role of the individual. The United States Constitution places substantial restrictions upon the government, with the aim of freeing the individual to pursue liberty and, by virtue of this, happiness.

The Preamble to the United States Constitution states specifically what the government is to do:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

The Constitution states that there are only three legitimate purposes by which the government is to act: a) to ensure domestic tranquility through having laws to protect individuals from criminals; b) to have a defense to protect individuals from foreign invaders; c) and to protect individuals from the whims of the mob by having a judicial system based upon objective laws to decide controversies between individuals. Nothing in the Constitution suggests that socialism is acceptable at all.

In fact, it was none other than socialist Venezuelan Dictator Hugo Chavez who said that the United States Constitution is too individualistic and ought to be reformed to be more socialist. Further, US Presidential candidate Barack Obama, parroting the same words as a third-world dictator, has lamented -- literally, has been complaining that the Constitution prevents the government from doing more things to the population.

Barack Obama wants to reorder American society such that you will no longer be in charge of your own life. Rather, he wants you to take orders from the government. He wants to coerce you into using less energy, and thus, as a consequence, your lifestyle will decrease (imagine getting around in Los Angeles without a car! Obama declares that you ought to get on the bus!) He wants to impose significantly higher tax rates on the most successful individuals and companies in America, thus creating incentives for them to work less or shift their activities abroad. This is a recipe for decline in America.

It gets worse. Obama's effort to impose a judicial dictatorship could make it literally impossible to reverse many of his poor policies.

In a video (posted below), Barack Obama lamented that the Warren Court did not create a right to redistributive economic policies. Let us make that clear. What Obama has wanted is for the courts to impose a "right" to welfare, even absent a clear law from Congress. Obama believes that some individuals' productive efforts can be taken away on a whim and transferred to non-producers. He wants to create a permanent parasitic class that will continue to ask for more and more handouts (without lifting a finger to create wealth), while the producers will be overtaxed and exhausted from excessive taxation. The end result is obvious: the brilliant minds--the ones who create the services and the goods that we so depend upon, will work less, flee to another land (perhaps Ireland or Australia or Hong Kong), while the parasitic class will whine and ask for more, but the wealth will have fled to more hospitable locations. We're on the road to serfdom. Undecided voters--you can stop the road to serfdom by voting for John McCain next Tuesday.

"Joe the Plumber" shows the immorality of the Obama socialists.

Barack Obama has taken a new low: he is attacking a citizen for daring to question one of his socialist policy proposals. Obama's campaign has rapidly gone after Joe, digging up dirt, and trying to disparage this ordinary citizen just for daring to ask why Obama wants to tax him more "just for being successful." "Joe the Plumber's" real name is Joe Wurzelbacher. By asking how it is moral to tax Wurzelbacher more if he happened to make more than $250,000, "Joe the Plumber" was wondering how government confiscation of his wealth would be helpful to him. Joe the Plumber was showing that it is not moral to take away more of one's earned property just because they happened to be more successful.

In a capitalist society, the rewards for one's labor should increase as one is far more successful.

Thus, this is precisely what encourages a person to try to raise their productivity, whether it is through education, capital infusion (such as technology), experience, or through a variety of all of these factors. What Obama proposes, however, is to lessen the incentives to work harder, save, invest, receive an education, and to start a business. Obama and the socialist Democrats hate the "Joe the Plumbers" of the world because these men and women derive happiness from pursuing their own self-interest, using their talents and their minds to engage in voluntary exchanges with others. This is the moral system we call capitalism, a system that the Obama socialist Democrats strongly oppose. They do not want people to pursue their own interest because it means that they do not derive their happiness from the whims and favors of elected thugs like Obama. Rather, what Obama wants is to tax the "Joe the Plumbers" to the point in which they are no longer wealthy, at which point they will then be subject to whatever the Obama socialists choose to hang out among the crums at their disposal. This is what is considered "moral" in the Obama view. It is moral because, under the Obama perspective, it gives him more authority over Joe's life.

And further, this socialist intention is truly to ensure that Joe the Plumber works far less than he does.

If the "Joe the Plumber's" of the world are going to pay significantly higher taxes once he makes $250,000, is there a good reason to try to establish a world class, successful, and dynamic company? Obama sees fit to destroy Joe's dream of having a company that makes more than $250,000 a year. This is not entirely unheard of in America. After all, this is the land of promising capitalistic potential. What is interesting is that it is a foreigner, French President Sarkozy, who best explained the capitalist ideal. I quote:

"America did not tell the millions of men and women who came from every country in the world and who—with their hands, their intelligence and their heart—built the greatest nation in the world: "Come, and everything will be given to you." She said: "Come, and the only limits to what you'll be able to achieve will be your own courage and your own talent." America embodies this extraordinary ability to grant each and every person a second chance.

"Here, both the humblest and most illustrious citizens alike know that nothing is owed to them and that everything has to be earned. That's what constitutes the moral value of America. America did not teach men the idea of freedom; she taught them how to practice it. And she fought for this freedom whenever she felt it to be threatened somewhere in the world. It was by watching America grow that men and women understood that freedom was possible."

The other thing that is not mentioned is how imposing significantly higher taxes has the effect of "freezing" companies where they already are. Since income and corporate taxes would go up significantly, this would serve as a natural barrier for already established, large companies who would not have to face the potential competition of a small upstart, and more efficient company. A company like Microsoft or Google may even welcome such higher taxes because it would mean that their potential competitors will be "frozen" out because the entrepreneurs who would otherwise be working hard to challenge them will instead think that spending time on a California beach is a better use of their time than paying 70% of their income in taxes. Even if such an entrepreneur wanted to try to compete in this playing field, it would take much longer to establish a large company when a significant share of his income will be confiscated by taxes.

Thus, let it be known, from Florida to Alaska, from Hawaii to Maine, that the real intention of the Obama socialists is to destroy the entrepreneurial class--the "Joe the Plumber's"--by taking away their hopes and dreams, demoralizing them, subjecting these citizens to government confiscation of their earned rewards, and providing unearned benefits on those who have not created any wealth. As Sen. McCain so eloquently stated, "Senator Obama claims that wants to give a tax break to the middle class, but not only did he vote for higher taxes on the middle class in the Senate, his plan gives away your tax dollars to those who don't pay taxes." That's the plan--take away from those who create the wealth and give it away to those who have created nothing. Soon the country will run like Cuba since the talented will produce nothing while the parasitic class will still be asking for more unearned benefits, which will not arise because the productive class will have given up on giving more and more of their wealth.

It's time for the federal government to "sacrifice."

During last night's debate, moderator Tom Brokaw asked John McCain and Barack Obama how they would encourage "sacrifice" on the part of the American people. I like John McCain's answer, in which he said that the time has come in which government programs should be shrunk and, in some cases, completely abolished.

I also think that the other following policies should be enacted in order to encourage sacrifice on the part of the federal government.

• All federal salaries, except for employees of the federal judiciary, members of the military, the FBI, the Department of Justice, and any other department related to protecting individual rights, will receive a 25% across-the-board wage cut, and their salaries will be frozen for a period of 10 years.
• Impose a special windfall profits tax on government employees. After all, government employees are protected for life. Their pay is higher than many civilian positions. They ought to pay for this privilage of remaining on the job.
• Fire half the federal workforce. Most federal employees are completely useless. It's time we fire most of them.
• Prohibit any fun at federal workforces in order to encourage more federal employees to retire. Eliminate all internet access at federal workplaces.
• Cut the federal budget from $3.1 trillion to $1.2 trillion.

Now that's the type of sacrifice I would support.

Sarah Palin has won the debate against Joe Biden.

I am watching the debate between Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and Sen. Joe Biden. What is clear from this debate is that Sarah Palin is clearly cleaning up the house. She is arguing based upon the facts and offering a very articulate conservative political philosophy. Biden looks defensive and confused, and he has resorted to bring up tired-old liberal philosophies that are intended to scare people. Sarah Palin looks confident, assertive, in command of the facts, whereas Biden looks and sounds like a tired liberal hack.