Bloodsucking taxes for a country of leeches
By Tom Blanton
Red, white and blue — stars and stripes: America. Screw the fragment, hippie. The indication of democracy has come to mean so little, the feds might as well wrap a dime of OG Kush in a star-spangled blunt wrap and light it up atop the statue of liberty with a “freedom” Bic. Where’s the hammer and sickle? It’s baffling how powerful and obtrusive the federal government has become through the past decades in a country that was founded upon small federal intervention.
At the Republican National Convention, Mitt Romney pledged “to restore the promise of America” upon accepting the Republican presidential nomination. In addition, the Republican nominee accused President Barack Obama of failing to deliver on his promises. Quid pro quo, Mr. Romney. You try dealing with the pressures of the oval office, a split-powered congress and an incessantly whiny and needy country. Then, and only then, may you call Obama out for what would surely come to be a hypocritical statement.
Romney vowed to create 12 million American jobs over the next four years and turn around an economy saddled with an 8.3 percent unemployment rate; big words from a man not yet in power. It’s hard not to admire his fervent luster for restoring America to the vision he and the rest of the nation generally dream upon. Yet, quite admirably patriotic hoopleheads have imagined bright futures for America since the Declaration of Independence, the failures of which have made a bloated government strangle the country under its inconspicuous anti-democratic weight.
Obama has been handing out food stamps, health care and welfare like balloon animals at an aristocratic five-year-old’s birthday party, and though he claims it will balance itself out within years, America doesn’t have years to wait. Granted, with so many checks and balances and levels of government to deal with, it would be unfair to presume any nominee could change the country’s economy in any period of time the impatient inhabitants would give them.
Obama promised change four years ago; so far, a majority of those benefits have only positively affected the lower class, at the expense of the middle class and corporations. Obama has good intentions with his Robin Hood-like tactics which fool the poor and anger the “rich.” Unfortunately, the “rich” also includes the middle class in Obama’s eyes — the working class. When taxes are increased for productive households and flipped into handouts for those largely and stereotypically unproductive, the economy will end up in a worsened state than when those policies began. As sneaky as Obama is, his whole “change” campaign of 2008 could’ve just as easily meant “change” in the sense of currency, as American’s have found their pockets jingling more than before Mr. President won the election that gloomy day four years ago.
Considered an extremist in her time and ours, Ayn Rand once said, “If any civilization is to survive, it is the morality of altruism that men have to reject.” Obama’s whole platform is one made up of altruistic hippie-commune ideals that didn’t work in the late sixties, and certainly didn’t work in the Soviet Union.
America doesn’t need Obama as president. Individuals have become too dependent on government handouts and intervention in their lives; and the fed is breeding a generation of obese cartoons who are beginning to feel more and more entitled as Mommy and Daddy get letter after letter of handouts. Romney is by no means perfect either, but America needs to be taken more in the direction he — and his political entourage — is proposing. Obama’s vision for America goes completely against the dream the country was founded on, a dream that must be upheld to bring about lasting prosperity.