Are you really going THERE? Really?

Racism. Again.

After months of going around and around about government-run health care with every possible downside presented in public debate...after months of ordinary Americans objecting more and more to Uncle Sam reaching deeper into our pockets, the left is losing. So what do they do? They cry "Racism!" Again.

Isn't it strange that we're supposedly the racist ones, yet it's almost always a liberal bringing up the subject of race?

We got a brief reprieve from being called racists when Bush left office and the criminal immigration issue took a backseat to all of the debacles that Barack Hussein (yeah, I said it, so what?) Obama introduced into the American political scene. But now that they are losing the fight for "Universal Health Care" (read: costing American taxpayers all the money in the universe), they revert to their default position of calling Conservatives racists. Actually, this time they've expanded that to even non-conservatives who are opposed to the health "care" plan to which liberals have tied all their hopes and dreams.

The reason?

Despite proponents such as the late, great (in that order) Ted Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Chris Dodd, Joe Biden, and dozens more being white, President Barack Hussein Obama is black (sort of). Opposition to the health plan is simply because Obama is black (sort of). It doesn't really matter to anyone that Hillary care was shot down despite the fact that Hillary is white. Perhaps we were being sexist then... Can we please have a white male president present this plan so we can safely shoot it down?

In any case...I have a few questions for our accusers. If, in fact, people who oppose Obama's plan are racists, why is it suddenly wrong now when it was perfectly ok for 95% of blacks to vote for Obama? You could be intellectually dishonest and say that Obama reflects the beliefs of all of those 95%, but we all know that a very large portion (if not most) of them voted for Obama for one reason: HE'S BLACK (sort of). Now you can justify that any way you want, with reasons such as what an historic and momentous occasion it is (and I agree), but the fact is that it was, to quote Jeaneane Garofolo, "...racism, straight up."

Another question I have for those who call us racists is, if Obama's mother was white, why do we call him a "black man?" Isn't he half black, half white? Mulatto if you will? Why are we only acknowledging his blackness? Isn't this racist? Isn't this saying that being white is not something to be proud of? Am I the only one who feels like Obama is ashamed of his White heritage? How does this make other Mulattoes feel? It seems that Obama's (and his worshippers') failure to recognize mixed race is a slight to others who happen to be white or of mixed race.

And Barack Hussein Obama is not the only one to downplay or completely ignore his non-black heritage. It actually seems to be a growing trend. Tiger Woods is another example. Many people don't even know that Woods is only half black. He's also half Thai, but calls himself black. I have never heard him publicly talk about his Thai heritage. Most of the Kingdom of Thailand is very put off by his lack of acknowledgment, and rightfully so.

Back to the argument at hand. It wasn't until the left started losing the fight that they started playing the race card en masse. It's really nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to distract the public and keep us away from the main arguments, which are about the efficacy, practicality, and wisdom of Obama's policies.

I have questions for any conservatives or other common-sense Americans who are directly accused of racism for opposing Obama to ask:

What was it in what I said or in my behavior that indicated racism to you, instead of indicating simple opposition to policy?

Are you saying that you think that, if we had a white president, I would be completely on-board with this plan? Why would I, as a [conservative/libertarian/Constituionalist/independent] endorse such a liberal policy?

It's clear that you think I'm a racist. But let's just say for the sake of argument that I'm not a racist and that I'm actually simply opposed to Obama's policies. How would you recommend that I express my opposition to Obama's proposed plans without running the risk of being accused of racism?

My guess is that your accuser will not be able to answer any of these with anything resembling a well-thought-out answer. You'll most likely get a reply to the effect of, "Well, you're just trying to hide it, but we all know you and people like you are racists," which will only serve to prove that it's nothing more than an attempt at distraction.

Don't take the bait. Ask the questions, and when you don't get any answers, direct the argument back to the issues and away from the accusations. If your opponent refuses to debate the actual issues, then guess what...

You win!

A Moral Obligation to Sin?

Last Wednesday President Obama, desperate to salvage any hope of getting something resembling a "health care" bill with a "public option" (read: government controlled) passed, turned to religious leaders imploring them to support his power-grab.

The gist of his spin was that it is the responsibility of people to care for their fellow man in need. He called it a "core ethical and moral obligation." So far, so good, right? I mean, isn't that a basic tenet of Christianity? Of course it is. Christians are taught to tithe, or give a tenth of one's income to help the poor. This is strictly voluntary, of course, and more or less can be given at any time. This is called "charity." Charity is a good thing.

Obama, trying to tie his "health care plan" in with such a concept shows how low he has sunk from his own Messianic status at the beginning of the year.

Aside from his apparent attempt to see how far he can push the line of the ficticious, but strongly held by liberals as law, separation of church and state, he seems to be overlooking one major hole in his theory. This is probably because the only Christian "religion" he's gotten in the past 20 years is by Jeremiah Wright, who spends more time putting down whitey and the USA than he does relating the teachings of Jesus or the Ten Commandments. And of course Obama didn't actually listen for those 20 years, as he said he didn't hear the hate spewing from his hate-monger "reverend."

The oversight in question would be the Seventh Commandment, "Thou shalt not steal."

Everyone would agree that there are certain things that we, as members of a free society (and thus the beneficiaries thereof), should have to pay for. The national defense, infrastructure such as roads, water supply, etc. These are things that go to the "public good." They don't benefit any one individual more than another, and it is these things that allow you to be able to participate in the system we have and therefore make your living.

However, the government, for the better part of the last century, has been getting more and more out of control, and nothing exemplifies this better than the Obama administration and the Democratic majority we've had since 2006. Forgetting that it was never the federal government's right to tax individual citizens in the first place but that the citizenry had overlooked this at the start because it was to pay for the public good, and taxes were low and managable at the onset, the politicians have increasingly seen the taxpayer as their own personal bank account.

We, as Americans, pay an average of almost a third of our income to the government. That means that the government takes four months of your income every year. Do you approve of this? I certainly don't. And the only way this health care bill will be paid for is by raising your taxes even more. Side note: Don't buy into the "tax the rich to pay for this" hype. If you took 100% of the income of every American making over $500,000.00 a year you'd generate $1.2 trillion. Since we're talking about a $9 trillion deficit now, well, I'm sure the math isn't that hard for you.

Anyway, back to the Seventh Commandment. Thou Shalt Not Steal. I think we can all agree that stealing is taking something belonging to another without his consent. If the Commandment itself isn't enough to convince you, then I'll use Colorado Revised Statutes as an example:

C.R.S. 18-4-401 Theft
(1) A person commits theft when he knowingly obtains or exercises control over anything of value of another without authorization, or by threat or deception, and:
(a) intends to deprive the other person permanently of the use or benefit of the thing of value

Theft is a class 4 felony in the state of Colorado over $500.

But let me take it one more step...

C.R.S. 18-4-301 Robbery
(1) A person who knowingly takes anything of value from the person or presence of another by the used of force, threats, or intimidation commits robbery.

I cited the robbery statute because of what would happen to someone who refused to pay his taxes. I would much rather be beaten up by a bona fide robber than arrested and jailed for years for tax evasion. I'll also note that robbery is a class 4 felony regardless of amount (not that any of us OVER the poverty line don't pay more than $500 in taxes).

Now, if you're a thinker (and sadly those seem to be in short supply nowadays), you're probably wondering how I'm making the leap to linking the government with common thieves.

Well, again, it goes back to the public good. What Obama, Pelosi, and Company are doing now in their desire for power and to pander to those who voted them into office is to take our money and use it not for the public good (roads, bridges, the military, etc.) but for the individual good. When did this become acceptable, even in thought, in the United States of America? We let Social "Security" slide. We let Medicare slide. We even let Medicaid slide. After all we feel bad for the elderly and the temporarily infirm. Old people helped build the country we know today. And many people need a helping hand with a catastrophic ailment or injury to get better. But now they want the government to insure everyone.

Got a sniffle? Go to the hospital! It's on Uncle Sam!

Don't feel like getting a job? You don't have to now! Health care is FREE!!! (to you, not the taxpayer).

Taking my money or your money to give to someone who just doesn't feel like working for it is simply nothing more than theft. It's stealing, plain and simple.

One could fall back on majority rule, or some such weak justification for taking money I don't want you to take, but the fact is that well over half of the people are opposed to a government-controlled health care system. Yes, We the People voted these idiots into office (not me personally, though). But the 2010 elections are drawing near.

It's time to get a new set of people in office; people who will actually represent us; people who understand that while charity is a great thing, it's only charity if it's voluntary. If it's not voluntary, it's theft or robbery.