Okay so the other day I was watching TV and my program was interrupted by another one of those "my name is Barack Obama, and I approve this message" political ads. It was rather bothersome, because it claimed that Mitt Romney was out of touch with Americans, and insisted that because he was wealthy he wanted to help his wealthy friends, and tax all the poor people. Then the political ad insinuated that if Mitt Romney was elected they could lose their Medicare, food stamps, and be thrust into poor hood.
Yes, this was definitely a scare tactic, but it is alarming that an American sitting president would allow his campaign to run such ads. Now then, let me ask you a question; are the supporters of Barack Obama fearful that if the Republicans are able to get Mitt Romney elected that he will then take away their food stamps and freebies? You might not think this a relevant question, but I assure you that it very much is, and let me explain why.
When Mitt Romney noted to a group of supporters that 47% of the people that planned on voting for Barack Obama who were on government aid or food stamps probably wouldn't switch their votes, he's probably right, and statistically speaking, I am sure we can prove what he said is mathematically correct simply by taking surveys. In fact a recent survey showed that Mitt Romney was actually only one or two points behind Barack Obama when all the people who were called were called using land lines rather than cell phone numbers.
Consider if you will that if someone has a land phone line, chances are they've owned the home and that phone number for quite a while. People buying homes today often do not put in a land line because they don't need one, they have a mobile phone. Also, those who are renting a home probably do not have a landline either, along with apartment dwellers.
Now then, this gets back to another point of contention, our founding fathers thought that the electorate should be those who owned their home, because they had a stake in the future of the country, much more so than those that didn't owned property. They didn't want those who had little to lose to bankrupt the government demanding free stuff
Even though Barack Obama and his campaign took what Mitt Romney said out of context, and blew it out of proportion in the media, Mitt Romney was actually correct in what he was saying. But just the fact that he is correct, and that he said it, might be enough to allow the Obama campaign to use that information to scare the ever living bejesus out of those who are getting money from the government, and get them to come to the polls and vote out of fear that they might lose that free money streaming in each month.
It's easy to start a social program, but taking away or reducing it is quite another thing indeed. Did you see what happened in Spain, Italy, and Greece when they tried to go for austerity? There was rioting in the streets. And I must say we are driving down that dead end road towards socialism which leads to a cliff, a federal government financial debt cliff. The socialists know how to play this, and these fear tactics that the Obama campaign are using in these political ads are a play right out of that playbook. Please consider all this and think on it.
Lance Winslow has launched a new provocative series of eBooks on Politics and Economics. Lance Winslow is a retired Founder of a Nationwide Franchise Chain, and now runs the Online Think Tank; http://www.worldthinktank.net/
No comments:
Post a Comment