2008-11-06 - 4:40 a.m.

So the masses have spoken.

The new leader of the world will be the first socialistic president in our collective history. Oh, I am not including the closet socialistic tendencies of leftist leaders that emerged after securing the office of President. I mean unabashed, in-your-face socialism.

I am not blindly throwing out labels. This man has threatened to (but not limited to) bankrupt the coal industry and necessarily drive up energy costs, redistribute wealth, and implement a civilian national security force just as strong and well funded as the military. While the first two examples are economic grabs, the latter is pure social reengineering. Some have defined the Civilian National Security Force as a department for mandatory indoctinal social service such as Peace Corps, Green Job Corps, Senior Citizen Corps, Health Corps, and Classroom Corps (list compiled from examples I have read.) Many see this is a potential Police State entity pitching citizen against citizen. Just as with many of Obama's proposals, the details are vague at best, the intent is not vague at all.

For two hundered thirty two years the United States of American has promoted the essence of freedom; individualism. Last night, Obama directly pointed out that we are no longer a collection of individuals, but will rise and fall as one people. He further stated change cannot happen if we go back to the way things have been in the past. To clarify that he defined "change" as coming about through service to the state and through citizens' sacrifices . . . looking after not oneself but to each other.

Liberty is not defined as equal sharing of wealth my friends. Liberty is the equal opportunity to succeed. It is up to the individual to define how much success is enough, not the government! We may be witnessing the begining of the end for liberty as we know it.

Through the election we heard the confiscation of earnings of those making $250,000 and up (down to $125,000 and falling in late speeches) and parsing it out to those who do not pay takes is fair. Confiscation of earnings is NOT FAIR!

I was ashamed when Obama made his childish defense of his policies being socialistic, "will McCain say it was Socialistic for me to give away my peanutbutter and jelly sandwich in kindergarten?" Ashamed for the childishness of the remark itself, the ineptitude of the example, and the press not calling him out on the error. Mr. Obama. YOU gave away your PB&J . . . the government did not confiscate it and give it to your classmate. BIG DIFFERENCE!

We will now be punishing the risk takers. Punishing initiative. Punishing inovation. Punishing SUCCESS!

So, who has to much money? Oh, big oil does . . . ummmm then there is the coal industry . . . oh, and then there is big pharmacutical and on and on. Where does it stop? When will a government agent set the wage ceiling for YOUR job? Afterall, fair is fair. Why should a truck driver in Tennessee make more than a truck driver in Montana? There may be a time coming when it will no longer matter what the free market will pay. Perhaps this will be defined in the Civilian National Security Force scale wage guide.

So now we know that personal sacrifices, on top of taxes, are patriotic. All things equal. Equality mandated. Equally adjudicated. Equal misery.

OH... I forgot to answer the burning question above. So how much should a truck driver make? Well, off the top of my head I don't know at the moment. I will fill out the proper forms and we can expect an answer in 6 to 8 months. However, I am angling for the position of Political Officer for my sector. Maybe I can bump up the pay ceiling a few rubles if you give me your dog so I can eat him on meatless tuesday.

previous - next