I'm not a fan of either candidate. I am afraid of McCain following in Bush's footsteps with how he's handled the terrorist attacks, with our economy, and our education. I'm afraid he may have this "all Muslims are terrorists" mentality that the Bush W.'s administration has started, I'm afraid we're just gonna waste more lives and money in the war in Iraq, and other bad decisions such as the "No Child Left Behind" program. I've yet heard one school teacher that praises it, including Candice's aunt who's a school teacher.
I've done a little research into Obama's ties with anti-American organizations, and I personally don't know what to think. I've heard both sides, and neither of them can offer me enough satisfying hardcore evidence of his involvement with these groups. So, I don't have an opinion on this topic whatsoever.
I do agree that the less involvement the government has, the better, but it seems that both parties, Republican and Democratic, have been inflating our central government beyond control. To me, it seems that the only party that genuinely wants to deflate our central government and give more control back to the states, counties, towns, etc. is the Libertarian party. This has been one of their biggest agendas since I've been voting for the last 15 years, and probably much longer.
The Republicans has had the majority of control for several years, and yet our central government is as big or if not bigger than it's ever been, and has more control than it ever has ever since the "Patriot" Act (notice the abbreviations) was voted in. Not sure what I'm talking about? Talk to people like a friend of mine, Trey, who has no previous criminal records, and for saying negative comments in either phone conversations or e-mails about Bush W., and see how much of our freedoms have been taken away. He had to pay a $4,000 retainer fee for a federal lawyer to get him out of an e-mail venting his unhappiness with Bush W. sent to a personal friend of his. Need I mention the FBI ransacking his house, literally tearing all his belongings apart like you'd see in a Mafia movie, and then taking his computer for several weeks? Not one word was mentioned in the e-mail about him personally threatening Bush W.'s life. Now that's freedom. Let me ask you this: Would you sacrifice your freedoms as an American citizen and live with the fear of possible terrorism, or live in a Socialistic government where you can't speak negatively about your political leaders and feel safer from terrorism? I personally choose freedom. I'd rather live in fear of terrorists than I would of our own government. Don't believe me? Send someone an e-mail right now that someone (not you specifically) should take-out Bush W., wait a couple of months, and see what happens. From the stories I've heard, I could be getting myself in a lot of trouble just for saying that last sentence here.
I have mixed emotions about taxing corporations or not. Yes, it seems more fair, but yet, its the corporations, such as the one I work for, that provide us with jobs. So, personally, I think we should do away with all of the current tax laws and switch to a pure sales tax system. Why? For a few of reasons. First, you're only taxed with how much you spend. If you can only afford a small car, a small house, minor "luxuries", and basic necessities for your home, you'll pay less taxes than those who are wealthy, owns several high-priced cars, several mansions, and buys many luxuries. Plus, there's a lot less "loopholes" in a sales tax system versus our current income-based tax system. Lastly, I once heard that about 30% of all US incomes aren't claimed or taxed. That could include abusing the current"loopholes" mentioned above, to doing any sort of work and not claiming it (such as legal and illegal immigrants), to even illegal work such as selling drugs or prostitution. So, in a sales tax system, the people who aren't currently paying taxes will have to if they buy anything at the sales register. Sure, there's "loopholes" in this system, but much less compared to our current income tax system. However, if we continue with our currently flawed income tax system, then we should only give tax breaks to companies who maintain to operate only in the US versus those who operate outside of it. Last I heard, all of these ideas are currently supported by the Libertarian party.
I have no problems with RESPONSIBLE people owning guns, and even up to anything that isn't explosive, such as grenades or missiles. However, I do believe that if you want to own a gun, you must take a safety course in gun ownership and a license to do so. What should the difference between owning a gun and driving a car be? None to me. But if you do abuse the right to own a gun, then your rights should be taken away from you, just like abusing your right to drive a car. Also, supported by the Libertarian party.
I also have mixed opinions about healthcare. I wouldn't mind the government giving us basic healthcare, like HMO, if you will, and at least for anyone under the age of 18. Too many children out there don't have healthcare, and they did nothing wrong but just being born. However, if you want additional healthcare, such as PPO, if you will, then you should have to purchase that from private companies. I also think healthcare along with the insurance industry is a scam, and should be opened-up a lot more for free enterprise than it is. Not enough competition to keep healthcare prices down. I'm unfamiliar with the healthcare and insurance laws, but I'm sure most of them are written in the favor of these two greedy industries.
And yes, Bush did have to have approval in order to have invaded Iraq, which was something I was against from Day 1. I could easily see through the b.s. lies of our administration, and was appalled few others did. First of all, how many different lies did we have to endure to convince us all that we needed to invade Iraq? I lost count. Doesn't anyone remember how Bush Senior and Rumsfeld made comments that Iraq wasn't a direct threat to the US, and invading would be a huge mistake? Yet Bush W. used "weapons of mass destruction" to persuade Congress and the American people to do so. Doesn't anyone remember that the first thing we took control over was Iraq's oil fields before anything else, and we've managed to maintain that control no matter what, even though we've managed to lose control of many other regions and cities in Iraq? And even though we have total control over Iraq's oil fields, our gas prices keep getting higher, and Bush's family made their wealth from oil? Am I the only one who sees this? I have heard of "rumors" (whether they be true or not) that Bush "bullied" several people into voting for this war. I've also heard many stories of people losing their jobs because they didn't, whether it was from scandals or simply getting fired. I even remember several politicians speaking out against this war in the beginning, and they were immediately silenced thereafter. And yes, I'm pretty darn sure I would've handled it all differently if I were president. If I had really thought that Osama bin Laden was behind 9/11, then I would've tried my absolute best to have sent the same amount of force in the same amount of time that we did Iraq, and that's why I'm so angry! RRRAAAWWWRRR!!! Sorry, couldn't contain myself any longer. ;-) But seriously, why we were able to take out a powerful dictator and his army, but couldn't catch a fugitive? Just doesn't seem right to me. I knew this whole thing was b.s. from the very moment I heard the news that we were letting the warlords find and take out Osama bin Laden instead of our military, in which most of them sided with bin Laden afterwards. Wow, I never saw that coming. Geesh. Many of the things I've researched about this current administration absolutely terrorizes and sickens me. Most people have no clue, and don't want to know. I have no faith in the Republican party.
I, as an agnostic, tend to have set higher morals and ethics than those of most "religious" people (customers) I encounter on a daily basis at my work. And most of my atheist friends are the same way, as well. None of us are bound by any laws set by "God", yet we adhere to the knowledge and understanding that by living good, decent lives without negative actions towards others is for the better of society. So, with that in mind, I hold very little credit with one's beliefs in politics. Men of religion have been just as monstrous as men of science have been.
I personally don't agree with live birth abortions, or abortion for that matter, but I have no problems with same-sex marriages, and I also have no problems with homosexuality, either. I do believe some people are born gay, and personally know people who are. I wish I could say more on this topic without being too personal and revealing about these people I know, and without them feeling like I'm advertising their personal lives. So, I won't and I'll will leave this topic alone. But trust me on this one, people are born gay, and nothing they can do to change it. The suicidal rate triples or more when you try to "convert" (for lack of a better word) someone who's gay to straight. So, should we punish these people for being born this way? I think they should have to endure the same crap many married straight people have to go through... DIVORCE!!! LMAO :-) I almost look at it as a blessing that gay people can't get married! LOL
Back to abortion, though, if you study the personal beliefs of people all over the world, you would be amazed and shocked by the religions you'll find that has approved of live birth abortions throughout the last couple of thousand of years or more! So, yes, to me, it is morally wrong, but only because of the way I was raised. However, if I had been raised in a different culture in particular parts of the world, then live birth abortion isn't considered "wrong" or "evil". So, what can you say to someone who wasn't raised the same way as we were, that considers this as a part of their religious beliefs for the last couple of thousand of years or more? Impose our morals upon them? I wouldn't want them to impose their morals upon me! Plus, while on the topic of abortion, if Bush is so against it, and he had several years of almost total control of the Congress, then why is it still legal? The fact is, even if a president wanted to change the abortion laws, they can't. Doesn't really matter who you vote for when it comes to the abortion issue since they can't hardly touch the abortion laws, anyways.
No comments:
Post a Comment