What strikes you about this add? It's the language. It breaks a lot of rules about how a civil person would act. It's once thing, as I do, to disagree with Obama's policies. It's one thing to voice your opposition to the policies of the President. It's quite another to call not so nice names to his supporters.
Is it any wonder the Congress is deadlocked? People of both sides of any political discussion have very strong feelings about what causes they support. The first way to avoid finding middle ground is to make fun of, or even bully the people who feel the opposite.
There are good, conservative reason to stand in opposition to Obama's policies. If you doubt that, read this blog. Resorting to name calling is not the way to get our point across.
Now, as far as...
Obama's work experience. He was a US Senator when he was elected. If Obama is unqualified to be president, so were Andrew Jackson, Franklin Pierce, Benjamin Harrison, Warren G. Harding, and John F. Kennedy.
Conservative reason to oppose:
John McCain was also a US Senator. However, McCain had a longer history in the Senate and was present for most of his votes. It was easy to find his record on many issues. Obama was still a first term senator, and some people have said that it takes 6 years just to learn where all of the bathrooms are.
I do not agree with Obama's economic plan, but please remember who was president when the economy crashed in 2008 and what party he was from. That is the reason why most people who like Obamanomics choose as their reasoning.
Conservative reason to oppose:
The Economic plan first implemented under Reagan is a plan for growth, but also a plan for risk. The economy crashed in 2008 because companies were not prepared for the risk that comes with high growth, particularly in the real estate market. The plan can work again, especially if more people can prepare themselves for the risks.
There are people who voted for McCain or Romney because he was white. They were just as wrong.
Conservative rebuttal:
Race is never a reason to vote for or against someone. Period.
Again, this is said as if Republicans did not give away free stuff. The Republicans, even Ronald Reagan, gave away freebees to the public. Newt Gingrich, in the late 1990s, even though he helped balance the budget, was more concerned about tax cuts than actually paying the federal debt.
Conservative rebuttal:
The only reason for government give-aways is if the government is going to get more tax revenue than is spent. Very few give-aways meet this acid test.
Many people find security in labor unions. They see maintenance of the Union as a key to preserving their way of life. They might be misinformed, but tool in this context is very ugly word.
Conservative rebuttal:
Labor unions offer a false sense of job security. As was learned with the Hostess bankruptcy, if the company can't stay in business, there is little any labor union can do about it. The best job security comes from developing skills that are in demand.
It is true that nothing is free, and this is especially true of healthcare. But too many people are brought up with the idea that they do not have to pay for these things, and that someone else should pick up the bill. It will take decades to reprogram people otherwise.
Conservative rebuttal:
We do need to get out of the trap that someone else is going to pay for our health care. We need savings plans that roll over from year to year and we need to allow people to save their own money, tax free, to pay for health care needs on their own. As far as the escalating expense, however, the medical industry also needs to understand what their customer base is capable of paying. If cars, for example, saw the same kinds of escalating expenses that the health care industry has seen, we'd all be walking. Reliance on a 3rd party to pay 70-90% of someones medical bills is not a good business model. We need to ask people to pay more and we need to get the health care industry to give people a break on prices. We need to pay for the little things ourselves so that there is insurance money to cover the big things.
To the last point, I doubt anyone truly knows, republican or democrat, what President Obama really stands for. There is not such thing as a transparent politician. Transparent people don't get elected.
Conservative rebuttal:
It would be nice if politicians were more transparent. Who knows when that will happen. I suggest that if you ever run for office, that you bring transparency to politics. Maybe the trend will catch on.
Posts
