Barack Obama was elected by an ignorant electorate who was looking for government to take care of them. As I have tried to explain in a previous post, government cannot take care of us. The cost monetarily and the restrictions on our freedom are too great. If we cannot educate the populace, we cannot bring people to the understanding that we have elected tyrants that will seize the day by capitalizing on giving us what we think we want. We the people have always been fickle when it comes to who we put in office. For the longest time, the electorate could be broken down into thirds; one-third who would vote Republican, one-third voting Democrat and the final third would decide the outcome. This was especially true in this last general election. The Republicans, having betrayed the values of President Reagan (smaller government and fiscal responsibility), have begun a rift that is threatening to shatter its political base. The group polled as independent has grown while both republican and democratic parties have shrunk. I am concerned that this splintering effect will further give political power to a plurality of people that will once again vote themselves other people's money and will give up freedom for comfort and security. My question to you, the three people who read my ramblings, is: Does it Matter?
Does it matter that we have put a man in executive office that has no regard for the law? When restructuring Chrysler to sell to Fiat, the Obama administration helped put together a deal that would pay the union members a higher percentage of the sale price than those of the secured bond holders (you know, the guys who paid extra to ensure they would be first in line if the company should go bankrupt, which it did). This was in direct violation of bankruptcy law. When the court case was passed to the Supreme Court, rather than work to change the deal, the Obama administration wrote a letter to the Supreme Court asking them not to hear the case. What scares me is that somehow that letter was heeded. Another example of Obama's wanton disregard of the law is when he fired Inspector General Gerald Walpin. Most presidential political appointments serve at the behest of the president, but there is a law when it comes to inspector generals that the president has to give sixty days notice and give cause to congress before said firing. One might give Obama the excuse that he or anyone of his staff didn't know of this particular law. The only problem is that he co-sponsored this law in his short stint as a senator. Instead of working within the confines of the law, the Obama administration went out of their way to smear the good name of Gerald Walpin, accusing him of being senile. But why, oh why, is congress not doing their job and stopping this egregious use of power.
Does it matter that a growing number of Americans, to include myself, feel disenfranchised and powerless? Conservatives are not prone to demonstrations. We don't make a living hanging out in the streets as protesters. We're usually not that good at it. You would think that the media, congress and the President would stand up and take notice when the "Tea Parties" sprung up from grass roots conservative efforts. The main stream media cast aspersions on the party attendees, the congress ignored them and the President said he didn't know what was happening. Isn't it telling that much smaller protests get results when people want congress to do something (in most cases spending money or forcing other people to spend their money) but when we protest for congress to NOT do something, like not spending money, they ignore us and call us radical.
I ask in all sincerity, What do we do?