Debatoraide

It became painfully clear to me after watching last nights Presidential debate that ultimately we lose no matter who wins. That isn't to say that it doesn't matter which candidate gets elected; it certainly does. I have demonstrated on this blog (or attempted to), and so have many wiser than myself, how Barak Obama is a Neo-Marxist and would do everything in his power to make the situation for rank-and-file, specifically working, White, middle-class Americans even more taxing (literally) and unbearable.

The main problem is that John McCain will not make things better because he refuses to take a position of true reform that would be stripping our national government back down to its roots and return a hefty portion of responsibility back on the states themselves.

The problems with our nation, beyond the obvious crises at hand, are socialist policies and a huge Federal government that over the last two centuries has become bloated and unrecognizable from the Lockian, constitution based hybrid that was brought into being following the ratification of the Constitution in 1787. To get historical, the Confederacy (contrary to what you no doubt here on television or read in history survey textbooks) was established and then fought specifically to avoid the kind of government we now suffer under (a second War of Independence it was called at the time) and as a result of losing only added to the problems by giving Lincoln the opportunity to assume vast amounts of control for the Federal Government from the states. (Oddly enough, the humor site Craked.com gets it right in THIS list. Warning, language.)

Why do I bring this up first?
Listen to the debate again, specifically when the two candidates begin discussing healthcare reform. One of the first things Obama mentions is how he would make healthcare even more of a Federal initiative and not make it so people "have to take their money" "across state lines." McCain immediately came back with his belief that there is nothing wrong with giving States the option to enforce their own employer-based healthcare initiatives (an issue that is, in all reality none of the governments concern). When it was Obama's turn again, he even more vehemently attacked such a notion. Such a belief is indicative of Obama's biggest problem--he wants to grow the already overblown Federal Government to control every aspect of our lives while in the process removing what little rights States have left continuing the legacy of his heroes: Licoln, FDR, Clinton.

The United States Government should not, and was never intended to be, a social-wealthfare state. Yet every "issue" Obama is running on, and the reasons people will vote for him, are adding to or creating new social wellfare programs (wealth-redistribution, health care for everyone as a "right", government ensured retirement-housing-education, etc.) Obama wants the government to take care of you, because he (like all Democrats) believe they know best, and he'd be sitting right there at the top calling the shots.

McCain too is on board with a lot of the same retarded promises Obama is making, only he is making them differently. When healthcare came up, McCain as a true republican should have brushed the question off as irrelevant to the Presidency. Last night he proposed his plan to buy bad mortgages and sell them bad at the current value of the home. I about threw-up when I heard him say that. Nowhere in the constitution is the government given that kind of power, or incentive. Yet the "bailout" bill both candidates supported (and continue to laud) gives Washington just that ability--and far more. At least McCain didn't go so far as to call healthcare a "right."

People do have certain inalienable rights according to the men who fashioned this great nation, and unless I'm mistaken healthcare, education, retirement, and housing are not among them.