Vail Daily column: Obama snoring after political setbacks
Regarding “Obama scoring after political setbacks” (Valley Voices, May 26):
With respect to Jack Van Ens, this Christian couldn’t read the pro-Obama piece he wrote without forming the following conclusions:
• He uses his pulpit for political expression, when we all know that religion and politics don’t mix.
• His pro-Obama rhetoric forces me to believe that Fox News is indeed correct — the media is liberal after all. (Yes, Don Rogers. This stereotype is now perpetuated.)
• Jack’s resume speaks to dynamic storytelling and dramatic presentations, and in this case, the mission is fulfilled, however flawed in factual content.
Jack begins with a basketball analogy, correctly divulging Obama’s preference to lead from the left, which politically you would expect as a defender. Just when you are set, he deftly shifts to the right (bi-partisan devil) and lays-up, e.g. South Pacific trade agreement. The Senate minority lack of applause for this move is deafening.
Obama includes all Americans, not just older white guys (like you, Jack), fortifying himself (ask Valerie Jarrett how hard it is to reach him when the press comes calling). He’s not just playing basketball, he’s on the golf course. He picks tee times when the nation is under the greatest duress — beheadings included.
He directs federal justice programs to even the playing field (income inequality?). Read Warren Buffett’s diatribe about this topic.:
“Don’t blame the rich for income inequality. Tax subsidies are the answer.”
FYI: Government numbers show that under his two-term rule, rich got richer, poor got poorer. Same in South Africa under Apartheid black government. Desmond Tutu responded to this dilemma, “Evil has ensnared us all.”
So what are the feds doing about this issue? Taxing the wealthy, Robin Hood-style. Federal justice programs are those determined to avoid Ferguson and Baltimore tragedies, are they not? The mayor of Baltimore certainly acted as spokesperson for the DOJ without bias, didn’t she?
President Obama rejects socialism in which the promise is equal income. Then what purpose does his mandate for equal opportunity speak to? Is opportunity a synonym for income? Socialism appears from his past to be a driving raison d’etre, from his Dad who hated colonialism and major power countries (“Obama 2016,” D’Nesh D’Souza).
Margaret Thatcher once said, “Socialism doesn’t work, because sooner or later you run out of other people’s money.”
Obamacare: Jack, evidence has been clear on this. Employers changed work hours to suit their payrolls, sending workers to KFC, not for lunch but for work. Scott Gottlieb, from Forbes magazine, says, “2015 will be worse for Obamacare than its 2014 debut as a result of new burdens the White House is saddling onto insurers.”
It goes on to explain why insurers have not signed up to offer health plans on the state exchanges. They understand that they could be a niche market for higher risk and poor Americans with the remaining population responsible for higher premiums. Premiums are not decreasing, Jack, they are rising.
Immigration: Obama last year deported 600,000 Mexicans and Latin families, more than George Bush and any other president. Conservatives are careful not to criticize his enforcement record — just border enforcement as they stream in to vote on the left hand of Obama’s jump shot. Minorities overall have suffered, especially women in employment, income and health care opportunity during Obama’s tenure more than any Republican administration. Reagan said, famously, “Government doesn’t solve problems, it subsidizes them.”
Obama has yet to strike a deal with Iran (he needs Congressional approval), a country still persecuting Christians, and despite Billy Graham, they have no interest in our way of life. Obama does nothing when Christians are beheaded in Libya, Iraq — that is why, among other acts of contradictory faith-alliance, he is accused of indifference to our Judeo/Christian–founded nation. The same rhetoric applies to Cuba, the same country that imprisons political dissidents and thinkers without representation and kills anti-government activists. Does this sound like the kind of regime we should be negotiating with — Iran, Havana, Tehran, Myanmar?
This president still believes that kumbaya discussions are possible with despots and dictators who he believes will ultimately see the error of their ways. We can forgive them, as Christians, but not forget.
Jack, your rhetoric is general, not well-researched, and more suited should you be running for office.
Pat Mitchell lives in Edwards.