Well people are all going around applauding what Mr. Obama is doing but let me tell you something about his economic policies will take this country. Personally why should the rich have a tax hike put on them when some (not all) have worked hard. Lets look at people like Andrew Carnigee and others like him worked there butts off to make sure that they could make a good living for their family. (
THEY STARTED OUT POOR PEOPLE.)Secondly, why do we need to rely on our government to bale out all of these places. I say that we go with Senator John McCains idea that says "if they fail let them fail." What gives the United States Government the right to spend (OUR MONEY MIND YOU) to bale these people out.
Thirdly, lets look at the facts. This budget that Mr. Obama is proposing in Congress is the largest ever. The amount of money in this budget is more than from the time that this country was founded until now. Honestly people more money than all 250+ years combined. Does anyone else see anything wrong with this picture other than me? Shouldnt our government be doing something to stop wastefull spending instead of passing bills and budgets filled with pork projects for states and other things. The only thing President Obama cut out of this budget is a huge percent of the military spending. That scares me that he (the Messiah) wants to cut spending to keep us safe. How scary is this people.
Next, lets talk about this proposed universal medicare program that we are proposing Mr. President. When other countries have gone to this policy. Any ways we already have so many orginizations and govermental agencies covering people of all types. This was found on Wikepedia.com "The government directly covers 27.8% of the population
[14] through health care programs for the elderly, disabled, military service families and veterans, children, and some of the poor, through
Medicare,
Medicaid,
SCHIP, and
TRICARE." Why do we need more governmental control over our healthcare system if there already is 27.8% governmental involvment already. Are we as a country striving to be socialistic in nature? I have to agree with Rush when he says the answer to this question is YES!
The last thing that I want to talk about before I leave is this whole thing with seperation of church and state. This country was founded on a God known as Jesus christ. It gets me so angry when people twist what thomas jefferson said about seperation of church and state. Here was Thomas Jefferson's orginal quote,
"Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion,
or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
One of the Supreme Court's most blatant violations of the Constitution came about through their reinterpretation of the Bill of Rights - the first ten amendments. Prior to this constitutional violation, the Bill of Rights applied only to the federal government. Notice the actual language of the First Amendment: "Congress shall make no law…"
As one of many efforts to limit the power of the federal government, the Constitution left authority over religious matters to the States. The Supreme Court consistently adhered to this constitutional principle until well into the twentieth century.
But in the 1925 ruling, Gitlow v. New York, the Supreme Court began ignoring its predecessors and precedents. The Court reasoned that one of the purposes of the Fourteenth Amendment was to extend the Bill of Rights to the States. (This would obviously expand the powers of the federal courts to a great degree.) The history of the Fourteenth Amendment does not support their contention, nor do the earlier Courts.
Nonetheless, the 1925 Court ignored the historical record and the opinions of their predecessors, establishing a new precedent. Gitlow dealt with freedom of speech and the press; religious matters would soon follow.
In the context of religion, the Court's first and most abusive reinterpretation began in a 1940 Supreme Court ruling, Cantwell v. Connecticut. Here, the Court applied the "free exercise" clause of the First Amendment to the states. Again, religion was a State matter. State courts were, and are, completely capable of handling the issue. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court, in direct opposition to the original intentions of the Constitution, applied yet another portion of the Bill of Rights to the States. They did not stop there.
The next landmark ruling came down in 1947. In the case, Everson v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court applied the "establishment clause" of the First Amendment to the states. In the context of the "separation of church and state," the Court's foundational reinterpretation of the Constitution was complete. From 1947 forward, the Court has ruled with regularity on religious issues, in direct violation of the original meaning of the First Amendment. Their rulings, and those of lower courts (federal and State) have become the “law” of "separation of church and state."
Does this make any sense to any of us Christians out there. We need to hurry up and move back to our roots of our country and it needs to be quick.
Thanks again.
