Politics People Flip Flop On
With the political arena really heating up the closer we get to November, all issues are on the table. It seems that whatever one side has to say, the other takes the opposite viewpoint. This has been going on for so long, I've noticed that now sides are opposing their own stances! Here is a list of five debatable topics in politics people flip flop on. I wonder if someone can explain to me how you can want one thing, but do another?
One side of the aisle keeps telling us that the Unions are bad for the economy. Union workers cause corporations to spend more money, which in turn, makes them want to leave the United States and cause the unemployment rate to go up. Big fights this year have occurred in Wisconsin and Ohio where the Republican-Governor of Wisconsin, Scott Walker, might lose his position for trying to destroy the Unions. The school teachers, policemen, and firemen are portrayed as entitlement-seeking thugs who only want a free ride and higher wages while the private sector workers are pictured as making less money and have less benefits.
On the other hand, if you try to lower the salaries of corporations CEOs or destroy their golden parachutes and severance packages. We have to protect these people because they are the job creators and - even if they've driven their company into bankruptcy - we have to see how hard they have worked for their seven and eight figure incomes. It doesn't matter that they took billions of dollars of
government taxpayers dollars. We need to protect them from the ravages of the 99%. You have to remember: The Unions are organized and pooling their resources to influence elections, while Corporations should have First Amendment rights to buy help get their viewpoint heard, just like the average citizen.
At first we were told that Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, had ties to al-Qaeda who was responsible for the 911 attacks. Then we heard that he was developing weapons of mass destruction to be used against his own people or the United States. Finally, we were told that Saddam Hussein was an evil dictator and it was the duty of the United States to wage a ten year war against the people of Iraq to save them from Saddam (even though he was killed in 2006). All of this was justified at the time.
On the other hand, can you answer for me why is it that President Barack Obama was given grief for invading Libya to take down the dictator Muammar Gaddafyi? How can we say that he isn't our problem when it is exactly the same thing (except we didn't spend billions of dollars a month and stay there for a decade)?
While we are on the topic of good guys and bad guys, in 2001, when the United States was under attack by al-Qaeda, their leader, Osama bin Laden, was America's #1 target. He gave the order to fly hijacked airplanes into our buildings, killing thousands of Americans. Osama bin Laden wasn't just bad - he was EVIL. He masterminded plots to destroy our American way of life. OK, I agree with that. He was a bad guy because he ordered his operatives to kill our people.
Cut ahead to 2011. After more than a decade of listening to bin Laden talk about how he was going to crush the evil Americans, he was killed in a raid by American Navy SEALS. These brave men went in under the shadow of night and eliminated Osama bin Laden - arguably the worst terrorist in the world - under the direct order of President Barack Obama...and people shout that the President had nothing to do with it? How is that possible? Bin Laden is completely to blame for giving an order to kill people, yet when President Obama does exactly the same thing, he has nothing to do with it. Explain this to me...
It's a war that has been waging since the Middle Ages. The evil of Islam vs. the good of Christianity. The Muslims are the people who brought down the World Trade Center. The Muslims have a code of conduct that subjugates women and gays and the way people control their lives. The religion wants you to change your life to match their religious beliefs! This is something Rick Santorum said during the Iowa debates.
Can anyone answer me this? How is it any better that the Christian leaders (of which George W. Bush certainly was) goes into a Muslim country and attacks the people (this time for 10 years)? Does Christianity not have a set of laws that they want you to follow, regardless of your religion? Are conservative leaders not trying to regulate how women control their bodies? Are they not against gay rights and allowing them to save in the military? Are they not pushing their values on others? There are other religions in the United States. Why can't we all just pray in our own fashion in quiet without forcing our beliefs on others?
We already know that the Government is too involved in our lives. Right? We're spending money at an all time level and our grandchildren will be paying for the Liberal governments spending spree for the rest of their lives. There are too many government departments (like the Dept. of Education and the Dept. of Energy). Now they want to control your health care. How dare they try to make people healthier and live longer? Social Security will certainly go bankrupt if people pay into it their entire lives and then live too long! Why should we pay for health awareness or abortions? It's much cheaper to let women have these unwanted babies after we deny them contraception - especially after we get rid of the welfare system! Smaller government is the answer. Make people responsible for their own mistakes!
But answer me this? How is deregulating the EPA going to help the American people? Corporations are in the business of making money, not doing what is right. Just because they poison a bunch of babies isn't the government's concern. What about deregulating the FAA? It's only our air travel safety and the pilots should know how to fly the airplanes even after being in the air for 20 hours at a time. The real contradiction I see is what is with all of the new laws being created? Why do women have to have all of these new regulations on their bodies? Why are more laws being made to stop people from controlling their reproductive systems? It just doesn't make any sense...