Because we only received 12 DIGGs to reveal the research we have done on DIGG, we will not be submitting Part 2 at this time.
However, we will give our readers one more chance. In order for us to submit part 2 of our article on our site, we will require that this segment, even though it has little content relative to the first, get at least 40 DIGGs.
Upon receiving 40 DIGGs, part 2 will be disclosed.
We will give you a clue however. DIGG buries articles that reveal their secrets, so you have to want the answers to their secrets to DIGG despite the fact they will make every attempt to BURY this message.
As with any new President, though, of course there have to be concerns regarding what could go wrong in a new Presidency. So we are presenting the top 10 reasons we are concerned about Obama’s election. We intend to follow up each segment with an article that summarizes these concerns just like we will follow up on Part 1.
Thanks for reading.
Here are our 10 major concerns about Obama’s promises and election.
A scary health plan policy that will indirectly tax the healthy to pay for the sick, poor and elderly, shifting entitlement expenses such as Medicare to healthy Americans and small business.
Despite the incredible success of the Surge, the desire to end the Iraq war will likely not work. This could result in Iran invading Iraq, Civil War, genocide or worse. At the very least, Americans are likely to be disappointed as we find it cannot be done and the costs continue to spiral out of control.
Increased welfare and education costs for the not-so-needy. Problems in the welfare system are what started the Republican Presidential run. Abuse of government programs is just way too easy.
Higher cap gains and dividend tax could result in a major adjustment further downward in the stock market. The current tax system for stock investments is already incredibly unfair to anyone that loses money, and sharply overtaxes those that earn it even short term. Dividends are a central source of retirement income, taxing them unfairly targets the elderly.
Increased terrorism could occur if the expectations internationally of Obama are too high, and they get disappointed when nothing changes or if we get aggressive against Al Qaeda.
Assassination risk of Obama is high within the US. This is something we truly worry about. It would be a disaster to see our first multi-cultural President physically harmed in any way.
Social Security problems will be deferred for 10 years under Obama’s plan, and higher taxes will only address the problem short term. The plan for raising Social Security taxes 10 years from now is unrealistic and defers the problem to Obama’s successor.
Obama has made way too many campaign promises. Disappointment could be high as his policies fall apart.
The balance of power has shifted dramatically liberal. The loss of current checks and balances in the system between Democrats and Republicans could allow too many liberal programs to propagate. This could result in a massive deficit well in excess of we are are today.
We would like to throw in something we fear a bit that is not really a concern regarding Obama, but something we are sick of hearing and hope as we move forward stops. We have constantly heard the blather about everything in God’s creation being Bush’s fault. In many cases, the issues being discussed as Bush’s fault had little or nothing to do with him or his policies.
We sincerely hope that if Obama’s plans start to fail, we don’t just continually see what we refer to as “excuse politics”. We don’t want to hear…this failed because of Bush and we couldn’t do that because of Bush. We are hoping the Democrats mean it when they speak of non-partisan politics, but their recent attacks on Lieberman seem to indicate they are as partisan as ever.
Nancy got to eat crow today when Democrats were forced to offer tax cuts to get a bill passed that was already earmarked for success, all because she couldn’t keep her mouth shut. Read on folks, this is exactly the opposite of how adults act.
After Democrats and Republicans had spent days working together on a bipartisan bill to avert a national financial disaster, Democratic Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi took the low road in Congress in order to promote her Democratic agenda. Rather than congratulating the Congress for their bipartisan effort, she took the opportunity to instead bash George Bush for what she claimed were “reckless economic policies, fiscal irresponsibility and an anything goes policy”. After we heard the shrew’s comments, we could never vote for Obama. It demonstrates the Democrats have no concept of bipartisan cooperation.
After the bill failed to pass, Nancy then ironically stood with the founder of all our current problems, Barney Frank, Representative from Massachusetts. Barney (Rubble) Frank claimed the Republicans voted against the plan because Nancy had hurt their feelings.
We ask you Barney, how would you have reacted if the Republicans referred to you as a child abuser that used your influence to prevent regulation in 2003 that could have prevented this crisis. Awww, did we hurt your feelings Barney?
Nancy showed she is an amateur and was not interested in America or the plan. She was only interested in getting her chance to take a cheap shot. Her objective was to provoke a negative response, and if she thinks we cannot see right through her motivation, she is more stupid than she looks and more childish than she acts.
Nancy and Barney demonstrate that the liberals and Democrats are still bitter children that haven’t recovered from getting beaten in the last elections. They prove in their actions they could never cooperate with Republicans to reach any positive results for America. We are glad to see it, because the more they demonstrate their childish behavior, the less likely they will get America’s votes in November.
If we were running McCain’s campaign, we would get out a commercial immediately. We would show Nancy making a fool of herself and Barney lecturing people in 2003 to defeat regulations on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that could have averted this crisis.
This article is divided into parts. This first part includes our opinions regarding our use of fossil fuels and the direction we are taking to provide for our needs as well as to reduce our dependencies on those fossil fuels. It also makes suggestions that may seem somewhat radical for resolving these problems. In subsequent parts, we will look to expand on what we can do as a nation and look at the candidates, lining up their positions to see which best aligns with our opinion of how to approach the problem.
We are a “prima donna” nation. We (not the writers of this publication, but all of us) believe that it is all about us. We seem to believe that the world revolves around the United States, and if we protect our part of the world, it is just dandy if the rest of it falls into oblivion.
In some nations, it is all about a power grab to see who can get the most out of those resources, not how to preserve their environment or even preserve lives as they murder or enslave their countrymen for financial gain. Those that have gotten rich off of the US, like the Arab Nations, are more concerned with how to spend all the money than they are with how they destroy our environment. Despite all the billions that Saudi Arabia has made from oil, when have you ever heard they were investing in a plan to help reduce the world’s dependency on fossil fuels or offered a plan to reduce so-called greenhouse gases?
We have had many disasters throughout the world with respect to natural resources. We in America care about those disasters. A five billion dollar punitive damages award was the largest set of punitive fines ever handed out to a company for their irresponsibility, and it was leveled against Exxon for the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska.
Unfortunately, money talks. Recently, Exxon lawyers and the company’s financial influence led to the ratcheting back of that award to a paltry 500 Million dollars by our Supreme Court. This was a pathetic slap on the wrist and a very small portion of Exxon profits as they have taken advantage of our resources and consumption to make billions.
Irrespective of this irresponsible action by our Supreme Court, we as a nation, do care about our environment, but our reaction to such disasters has been to become overly cautious at home. We have new technologies to tap oil shale, but we are so worried about damaging the environment we have tied up the progress for years. We have massive oil reserves in Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico, but we are reluctant as a nation to tap them because we are concerned about the damage to our environment. Despite the fact that we have never had a nuclear plant disaster in the United States (although we came close years ago at Three Mile Island), and despite huge advances in our technology, we have essentially halted the advancement of the use of Nuclear Energy within the US.
What does that show? We care. We think our fight will help the world to survive. We all seem to want the environment to be clean, to preserve every species, to maintain our national wilderness. We, as a nation, above all others throughout the world, will fight to defend and propagate our world. Problem is, we are too self-centered and approaching it all wrong.
We continue, like Al Gore, to preach to the choir. We are a very small part of the problem, although, because of our consumption of fossil fuels, we may be a huge part of the source. We have to address our consumption while removing the guilt imposed by people like Al Gore that use huge amounts of energy while telling the rest of us we are at fault. And we do not believe addressing our consumption necessarily, in the short run, means reducing it.
In our supposedly noble fight to maintain our environment, we have clearly favored the US environment over that of the rest of the world, despite the fact we consume such huge quantities of the world’s resources. We consistently demonstrate a not in my back yard (NIMBY) “prima donna” mentality. It is fine for us to build new refineries, just not where we need to build them, in America. It is great that we are drilling less and using fewer of our natural resources, so long as we can import them from elsewhere. Let other nations destroy their environments and we will gladly use their resources while we babble on about alternative energy to make ourselves feel better. As long as we don’t see it, that is fine with us.
Our NIMBY attitude is so extreme, we preach about alternative energy, but actually block projects that would reduce our dependency on oil and help clean our environment. This was exemplified when a battle arose over a plan for a wind farm for Cape Cod, Massachusetts that would generate nearly half the electrical supply for Cape Cod and the islands of Martha’s Vineyard and Nantucket. It was hoped that this wind farm would be in place by 2005. It didn’t happen. Why? NIMBY!! Wayne Kurker, president of Hyannis Marina, formed the “Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound”, specifically to fight the wind farm proposal.
This quote from Wayne demonstrates how everyone in America seems to feel. ”A good portion of us who migrated to Cape Cod came to enjoy Nantucket Sound, and if Nantucket Sound becomes an industrial, electrical generation area, then it’s no longer the national treasure that people currently feel it is. We look at this as our wilderness, our national park.”
Great point Wayne, made despite research demonstrating how good the project would be for the Cape and how we could have set an example for the rest of the nation to turn to alternative energy sources. It is fine to pollute the rest of the world, burn coal and oil to generate our electricity, just don’t ask us to do anything about it in our back yard.
We, as a nation, must discard this NIMBY attitude. We have to tap our own natural resources now and also execute new revolutionary plans for alternate energy. We have to reduce our dependency on foreign oil to reduce our trade deficit and strengthen our dollar and to put us in control of our own destiny. Or should we instead bomb Iran?
Then, after we have solidified our financial position and become essentially independent of foreign oil in any way we can, we can better focus on alternate energy sources to reduce our use of fossil fuels. We are saying to pursue all solutions, now, whether they are ideal or not so we control our own destiny.
We are suggesting immediate action to drill in Alaska and in the Gulf of Mexico as well as tap other resources in the United States. We have the largest reserve of coal of any nation in the world. We can build refineries that convert this coal into petroleum that is cleaner burning than the petroleum we use now. The refineries may pollute more, but we have technologies to assist us. And we have enough coal to make enough petroleum to last the United States 200 years! We should tap our Oil Shale reserves and build new safer Nuclear Power Plants and we should do it now!
And when we are done, and as the world realizes we are willing to supply our own needs, our dollar will strengthen, our trade deficit will drop sharply! We may even start exporting natural resources to the rest of the world as we steadily reduce our need to import them. We can further develop alternate energy technologies with the money we didn’t give to other nations to meet our needs.
Let’s leave Part 1 with a question we will answer when we return. What nation does the United States import the most oil and petroleum from? The answer will surprise you.
So many people in our lives say, after the fact, “I told you so”. Does it ever help your current situation or make you feel better? Or does it just make you feel bad about yourself and wish what had gone before never happened? More importantly, did it ever make what had gone before any different? We will leave you to deal with these rhetorical questions.
Obama’s approach on this issue is to use exactly that tactic, “I told you so”. To tell not only McCain, but all citizens, Republicans and Democrats (including Biden) that believed in the war at the time that he (Obama) voted against it.
But the fact is, it doesn’t matter what our decisions were 7 years ago. 9/11 happened, we reacted, it’s over, we are there. We believe the candidate that should be favored with respect to this issue is the one most prepared to deal with it in the “now” not yesterday.
Vietnam and Korea were American disasters because we did not have the conviction to attack and destroy an enemy that was vastly inferior. Iraq was not the case. The US wiped out the Iraqi Army in weeks with almost no casualties. And we proved something in the process. That wiping out a nation’s leadership leaves us, by the nature of our government, responsible for that nation. As Colin Powell put it, “if you break it, you own it“. And after billions and billions of US dollars spent, indeed we do.
But what do our politicians really want to do now, in 2008? It seems Obama wants to bail and leave it up to Iraq to solve its own problems. It seems as though John is saying stay the course, but there is little indication there is a plan as to when it will be over. With McCain it seems like we could just police Iraq forever. With Obama, we see some light at the end of the tunnel, but that light might be a bus headed right for us as we emerge.
This is a lose-lose for both sides. The Iraq war was entered into not as the Democrats would currently have you think. It was not based on a lie. It was based on 9/11, an attack on us by radical Muslims and the belief that Iraq was the most rogue of the Muslim nations and had to be held accountable for harboring weapons of mass destruction and for supporting terrorism. No one now seems to recall, but Saddam was doing his best to avoid UN Inspections and did indeed appear to be hiding military secrets. Fact is, he just turned out to be a deluded lunatic that lived in a hollowed out tunnel after the war babbling to himself.
Now, what we realize is that even if Saddam Hussein was as dire and evil as he was depicted, the result of deposing him was an unstable Iraq. Imagine an America where US troops had to circle the streets daily to maintain order. Imagine what would happen if a nation stepped into our world and destroyed our government, regardless of whether it was led by Republicans or Democrats, introducing total anarchy. Would you want that government to stay and help restore order or would you want them to get out so you could? Sounds like the latter is the answer, but the only thing protecting you from the criminal elements is the very occupation force you despise. So, as Colin Powell presciently pronounced, once you depose the government, you become the government.
One interesting cause of war is what it does to a President’s approval rating. People think this is unique to Bush, and he is the worst President ever, but facts prove otherwise.
Bush’s approval rating is an abysmal 31%, but from CNN polling director Keating Holland we find… “Bush’s approval rating five years ago, at the start of the Iraq war, was 71 percent, and that 40-point drop is almost identical to the drop President Lyndon Johnson faced during the Vietnam War,”.
“Johnson’s approval rating was 74 percent just before Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution in 1964, which effectively authorized the Vietnam War. Four years later, his approval was down to 35 percent, a 39-point drop that is statistically identical to what Bush has faced so far over the length of the Iraq war,”.
America wants a fast victory, and war just doesn’t work that way, especially not occupations. The estimates at the time of the start of the war were that it would take 5 years or more to resolve things, but it is like a car payment. The first year, you love the car. The second year, you start disliking the payment and by the fourth year, you want to get rid of it.
The fact is, however, Iraq has gotten much better. A tactic called “The Surge” endorsed primarily by George Bush, against the advice of his generals and advisors, has worked. Bush sent 5 brigades of additional man power to Iraq and the violence has been reduced dramatically. Rumsfeld and General Casey were sent packing and Bob Gates and David Petraeus replaced them. And regardless of what the Democrats claim and what the public believes, in this instance, Bush was right. “The Surge” has been a huge success and that will make it very difficult for any dramatic change by a new President whether it is Obama or McCain.