Just touching on a few of the issues I have with Obama (there are many and this is just a few in no particular order):

Issue 1:

(ok, so I said no particular order but possesing a GFL (Georgia Firearms License) this is a biggie to me)

Obama: "Second Amendment last term is a great example, where the language of the Second Amendment is not perfectly clear. I believe that the Second Amendment is actually an individual right. I think that's the better interpretation. You can make the other argument. And so I can have those kinds of discussions with a justice without getting to the particulars of, 'Is Roe vs. Wade as currently outlined exactly what you believe?' Or, 'Do you agree that the DC gun law should have been overturned?' And I think Senator McCain, if he ends up being the nominee, could have those same conversations as well" ("Nightly News," 10/30).

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2008/10/hotline_after_d_474.html

The Second Amendment reads as follows:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

How is the language of the Second Amendment not perfectly clear? It is only not clear if you are a complete imbicile.

Notice the founding fathers didn't say "a well regulated militia, being an option for the security of a free state" - they said necessary because they recognized the vital importance of every day Americans being able to protect and defend the life and liberty we fought so hard to secure.

Also it says the RIGHT of the people. It doesn't say "a well regulated militia, being an option to the security of a free state, the government-deemed necessity of the people to keep and bear arms may or may not be infringed".



Issue 2:

I don't have a particular love of the coal industry. In the grand scheme of things I know little about it but it is disturbing to me that this, like so many other things, were ignored by the main stream media. His take on the coal industry - the one he wishes to bankrupt:

Let me sort of describe my overall policy.

What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there.

I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.

(from: http://media.newsbusters.org/stories/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry.html?q=blogs/p-j-gladnick/2008/11/02/hidden-audio-obama-tells-sf-chronicle-he-will-bankrupt-coal-industry)



Issue 3:

The "punished with a baby" remark:

"But it should also include -- it should also include other, you know, information about contraception because, look, I've got two daughters. 9 years old and 6 years old," he added.

"I am going to teach them first of all about values and morals. But if they make a mistake, I don't want them punished with a baby," Obama said.



I wonder how his daughters feel about that remark...



Issue 4:

Obama wants a civilian national security force:

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded." (emphasis added)



Um, we have that. It's called the United States Military. You know, the one he holds so much disdain for. The ones who do nothing more than air-raid villages and kill innocents. He wants his own "security force"...is that even just a little bit disturbing to anyone else?



Issue 5:

Redistributing the wealth:

Let's not forget he wants to "spread the wealth around" because "that's good for everybody". Excuse me? It's good for everybody? How is that good for me, if I'm the one you're stealing money from? How is it good for the one your giving my stolen money to? Because it sure doesn't teach them ambition, dedication, determination...it teaches them handouts. Don't we have enough of those already?

Seems he is in line with this statement:

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need
That is the basis of the communist society. Sounds a lot like redistribution to me.


I wrote a blurb last year about Veteran's day that was similar to what is written below but I think applies to Tuesday so I changed it a little and included in this rant :-)

If you haven't voted already I hope you plan on voting Tuesday. When you stand in line (surely there will still be lines) I hope you will take a good look around. We are able to have our voice counted on election day, shop at the mall, worship where we please, say and do pretty much whatever suits us because that guy over there made a sacrifice of his time, blood, sweat, tears, friends to ensure that we could. That elderly Walmart greeter fought for you. The lady that sits three rows up from you on Sunday morning cared for the wounded and dying so many years ago. That college kid spent last year clearing houses in the desert for you. They put the safety of your children, grandchildren, family before their own. You can bet election day has a different meaning to them. You can most certainly bet they would say they were just doing their part, just doing their job. They'd ask you to remember their buddies who didn't come home. We should do the same but never forget the ones that came home, the ones that still serve here and abroad. Think about what they - and their families - sacrifice so you can continue to have the priviledge of voting. Don't waste it.