Last week, my parents were in town, and my mom was telling me that she loves bbq'd ribs, but can't get them cooked like the restaurants. I've gotten more into cooking over the last year or 2, so I told her I would try to figure it out. I don't have a smoker or even a fancy rib cooking crockpot. I have an oven and a grill and today I gave cooking ribs a shot.
I'm a big fan of honey barbecue, so that was what I gravitated towards. I scoured the Internet using my top notch searching capability to find a recommended cooking method, a sauce recipe and suggestions for a rub. I also needed to know how to prepare the ribs prior to cooking...I would have never known to cut off the membrane on the back of the ribs without the Internet. I found a sauce recipe that I thought looked good, and most importantly didn't use alcohol. I don't like cooking with alcohol. I then looked for a cooking method, which I found from Dave Lieberman at Food Network.
At the risk of being just like another blogger I know, I'm going to duplicate what I did here so anyone (yes, you mom) can try this out. By the way, you should check out the link to that blog...looks like a really good KC BBQ recipe. I think the cooking method below is sound as the ribs turned out really good. They were juicy, cooked through and came off the bone easily. Feel free to experiment with the sauce and the rub...I think the cooking method is key and you can tailor the rest to your tastes.
Here's what I did:
Rub:
1 tablespoon salt
1 tablespoon garlic power
1 teaspoon onion powder
Add Black Pepper and Cayenne Pepper to taste
Note: I like a little heat so I did a fair amount of cayenne pepper. In the finished product, the heat was there but it was really subtle. This seemed to work well with the sauce.
Sauce:
1 cup honey
1 cup ketchup
1/2 cup soy sauce
1/4 cup white distilled vinegar
1 tablespoon yellow mustard
1 tablespoon paprika
1 tablespoon salt
1 tablespoon onion powder
1 tablespoon garlic powder
1/2 teaspoon black pepper
1/2 teaspoon ground cumin
Note: Again, because I like heat, I added extra cumin and black pepper.
Note: The soy sauce flavor did come through. I liked it, but if you are not a fan of soy sauce, use less, or try a different recipe.
Note: I only did 1 rack of ribs since my family is away. The sauce and rub were about right for 1 rack, though I was pretty liberal with the sauce. You could probably get 2 racks of ribs if you went more sparingly with the sauce.
To prepare the ribs (I used baby back):
-Add rub, somewhat liberally, and place the ribs in a 9x13 baking dish.
-Add sauce to the ribs and let them marinate for 10-12 hours. I used about 1/2 the sauce for this.
-Remove ribs from the fridge 30 mins prior to cooking.
-Preheat the oven to 350 degrees.
-Place ribs in the baking dish covered with tin foil on the center rack and let them cook for 90 minutes to 2 hours. I did 90 minutes...might have gone a little longer with more ribs.
-After the oven cooking is done, transfer the ribs to preheated grill. The grill should be at medium heat.
-Place the ribs meat side down and cook for 3-5 minutes to get them crispy. Be careful if you use a honey barbecue sauce...the sugar will burn. Brush on the sauce as you grill.
-Flip the ribs and cook for another 3-5 minutes on the grill. Continue to brush on the sauce.
-Remove from the grill and enjoy. Use the remainder of the sauce for dipping if you feel so moved.
That's what I did. The ribs turned out really good. Sadly I didn't have anyone else to confirm this because my family is out of town and my neighbors weren't home. So, if you try this and you don't like them, I guess I'm just crazy. Enjoy!
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Movie Review: Iron Man 2
Yesterday I went to "Iron Man 2" after work with a group of guys. I had heard relatively good things about "Iron Man 2" but wasn't sure what to expect. I liked "Iron Man" and rated it 4 stars. I was hoping "Iron Man 2" would live up to that standard, and it did...I enjoyed the sequel as much as the original. I'll go with a 4 star rating on this one, could have been a 5, but the ending was a little less spectacular than it could have been.
This time around, Tony Stark (a.k.a Iron Man), is having some sort of personal crisis. Though he has created relative peace in the world, Stark is being pressured by the U.S. Government to turn over the "Iron Man Weapon", facing competition from rival Justin Hammer, and having health issues. Tony starts taking unnecessary risks, which leads to a loss of public trust, and more importantly, loss of trust from his best friends Lt. Col James Rhodes and Pepper Potts. Then, Ivan Vanko (a.k.a Whiplash) appears on the scene, bent on destroying Tony, and the Stark family legacy. This all sets up nicely for Tony to have some life altering moments and save the day again.
Robert Downey Jr. is the perfect actor to play Tony Stark. I'm so glad Downey seems to have turned his life around because he is such a good actor. Gwyneth Paltrow returns as Pepper Potts, and she is excellent in that role. The back and forth interplay between Pepper and Tony is great. Don Cheadle takes over as James Rhodes (a.k.a Rhody), and does a good job. One of the best characters in the movie was Justin Hammer, played by Sam Rockwell...and played perfectly. The final new addition this time around was Scarlett Johansson, who kicks a little butt, and worked fairly well in the movie. I was a little worried that they had too much going on, but it all worked.
I can't imagine someone who liked the original "Iron Man" not liking "Iron Man 2", so if you enjoyed the original, give this one a shot. And, there is an additional scene after the credits...it's sort of worth staying for.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
The Greatest Game I Ever Played
I've been debating back and forth about whether I should blog about my recent golf outing. I don't want to seem like I'm gloating. But, since this is sort of a man diary, I decided I'd blog about it. Judge me as you will.
Last Friday, 3 friends and I took the day off and went golfing. We played at Saddleback Ridge, one of my favorite Iowa golf courses. Saddleback is a 6615 yard, par 72 links style golf course. Links meaning fairly wide open with some rolling hills, and you really need wind to make the course play difficult. Saddleback is neat because it has a ridge through the center of the golf course that you have to play up and down on several holes, adding some additional challenges. Also, it's fun because it has 6 par 5's, 6 par 4's and 6 par 3's...very rare. Most courses have 10 par 4's, 4 par 3's and 4 par 5's.
I've been working on a setup change recommended by Nuke who has forgotten more about golf than I'll ever know. This change has started to feel more comfortable and I'm starting to hit it better. On Friday, I was hitting it really well. I shot 1 under par on the front 9, which is really good for me. But, I've done this before...in fact, I've shot under par on 18 holes before, but I've only done that on 1 specific course, and it's a really easy course (short, wide open and flat greens). The best score I've ever shot on a real golf course over 18 holes is even par, and I've only done that a few times.
So, I made the turn at -1 and felt pretty good. I immediately birdied 10 to get to 2 under, but bogeyed 12 to go back to 1 under. I made another birdie at 15 to get back to 2 under, and that's when I got nervous. I couldn't believe I was nervous...this wasn't a tournament, it was just a fun found with good friends. My drives, which had been straight and long all day started leaking right. I made a par at 16, but then hit a terrible tee shot at 17 and made a bogey. Now I was really nervous. A couple of years ago, I came to 18 at Saddleback at even par, and missed an 8 foot birdie put to go -1 for the day, so I had that rolling around in my head. I'm such a mental weakling.
Hole 18 at Saddleback is a relatively short par 4, but there is Out of Bounds all down the left. I blocked my tee shot right and had about 145 yards left to the green on a severe downhill lie. I hit a solid 9 iron, but it went long. This left me about 1 yard off the green with a pretty severe downhill putt. I hit a good putt, but it went about 5 feet past the hole. At this point, my heart was pounding, but I just kept telling myself, make a good stroke and get it to the hole. The putt was relatively straight, so I just decided to play it straight. I pushed it right just a hair, but it dropped in the right center of the cup. I was so relieved and happy.
That round of 1 under par, 71 felt better than any round I've ever played. In truth, I felt like it's the first time I've ever shot under par on a real golf course. And, to make it even better, I got to share the day with good friends and the weather was perfect. I've always known golf is the greatest game in the world, and last Friday, I had the greatest game I've ever played.
Last Friday, 3 friends and I took the day off and went golfing. We played at Saddleback Ridge, one of my favorite Iowa golf courses. Saddleback is a 6615 yard, par 72 links style golf course. Links meaning fairly wide open with some rolling hills, and you really need wind to make the course play difficult. Saddleback is neat because it has a ridge through the center of the golf course that you have to play up and down on several holes, adding some additional challenges. Also, it's fun because it has 6 par 5's, 6 par 4's and 6 par 3's...very rare. Most courses have 10 par 4's, 4 par 3's and 4 par 5's.
I've been working on a setup change recommended by Nuke who has forgotten more about golf than I'll ever know. This change has started to feel more comfortable and I'm starting to hit it better. On Friday, I was hitting it really well. I shot 1 under par on the front 9, which is really good for me. But, I've done this before...in fact, I've shot under par on 18 holes before, but I've only done that on 1 specific course, and it's a really easy course (short, wide open and flat greens). The best score I've ever shot on a real golf course over 18 holes is even par, and I've only done that a few times.
So, I made the turn at -1 and felt pretty good. I immediately birdied 10 to get to 2 under, but bogeyed 12 to go back to 1 under. I made another birdie at 15 to get back to 2 under, and that's when I got nervous. I couldn't believe I was nervous...this wasn't a tournament, it was just a fun found with good friends. My drives, which had been straight and long all day started leaking right. I made a par at 16, but then hit a terrible tee shot at 17 and made a bogey. Now I was really nervous. A couple of years ago, I came to 18 at Saddleback at even par, and missed an 8 foot birdie put to go -1 for the day, so I had that rolling around in my head. I'm such a mental weakling.
Hole 18 at Saddleback is a relatively short par 4, but there is Out of Bounds all down the left. I blocked my tee shot right and had about 145 yards left to the green on a severe downhill lie. I hit a solid 9 iron, but it went long. This left me about 1 yard off the green with a pretty severe downhill putt. I hit a good putt, but it went about 5 feet past the hole. At this point, my heart was pounding, but I just kept telling myself, make a good stroke and get it to the hole. The putt was relatively straight, so I just decided to play it straight. I pushed it right just a hair, but it dropped in the right center of the cup. I was so relieved and happy.
That round of 1 under par, 71 felt better than any round I've ever played. In truth, I felt like it's the first time I've ever shot under par on a real golf course. And, to make it even better, I got to share the day with good friends and the weather was perfect. I've always known golf is the greatest game in the world, and last Friday, I had the greatest game I've ever played.
Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Now That's Leadership!
I wasn't going to do a political blog today, but while driving home, I heard some excerpts of what New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is doing and felt compelled blog about it. I spend so much time bashing politicians, that I thought I should praise one who is actually doing a good job. Christie is the recently elected Republican governor of Democrat-heavy New Jersey. Christie seems to be the kind of Conservative leader I believe our country needs to get back on track.
Governor Christie inherited a budget deficit of $10.9 billion on a budget of $29.3 billion. Rather than crying about the mess he inherited, Christie did 2 things. First, he was open and honest about the mess the state is in, and second, he went about the job of trying to fix the mess. Most importantly, he didn't raise taxes, instead, he vetoed a new tax on millionaires within minutes of it's passing out of the legislature, stating that “At some point people’s ability to pay runs out.” No, Christie looked at cutting government spending and putting responsible measures in place to fix things long term.
This is from Liz Peek on Foxnews.com, writing an opinion piece on Governor Christie, "That is also why he is proposing a 2.5% annual cap on property tax increases and on municipal spending going forward; if legislators want to impose a heftier rise, they will have to get approval from the voters. And, that is also why he is going after public employee unions, and most specifically the teachers’ union. New Jersey is not the only state that has given away its future to pay generous pensions and benefits for its public service employees, but it is one of the first to challenge those contracts. Christie makes clear that it is not teachers who are the focus of his ire; it is their union. He has asked the union to accept a one-year pay freeze – not a cut – and to shoulder 1.5% of the cost of their very generous health benefits. Teachers in New Jersey get full medical, dental and vision care for themselves and their families at no expense. By contrast, as Christie points out, federal employees pay 25% of such costs."
These all seem like common sense decisions to me, and one that every city, county, state and yes even the federal government should consider undertaking. Governor Christie is right, at some point people can't pay any more, and cuts have to be made. There is waste at all levels of government and real leadership is looking for ways to cut that waste and enact long term reforms to ensure history doesn't repeat itself. Governor Christie has chosen a difficult path, but if he is successful, New Jersey will be a great shape for the long run.
This is the kind of leadership sorely needed at the federal level. As I've stated before, our debt situation is unsustainable. We need our leaders to be honest about that. Too many people don't understand how bad it is, because for the last 30 years, politicians have kept us focused on everything but our mounting debt. In my opinion, we are approaching a tipping point, and something will have to be done. Major changes will be needed, and more taxes aren't going to fix what ails us. Cuts are going to have to be made to all areas of the federal government, and these cuts will be difficult. The leader who finally has the guts to do what is necessary will be vilified by his/her opponents, but hopefully that person will have the fortitude to do what is necessary and set our country back on the path that made this the greatest country in the history of the world.
Governor Christie inherited a budget deficit of $10.9 billion on a budget of $29.3 billion. Rather than crying about the mess he inherited, Christie did 2 things. First, he was open and honest about the mess the state is in, and second, he went about the job of trying to fix the mess. Most importantly, he didn't raise taxes, instead, he vetoed a new tax on millionaires within minutes of it's passing out of the legislature, stating that “At some point people’s ability to pay runs out.” No, Christie looked at cutting government spending and putting responsible measures in place to fix things long term.
This is from Liz Peek on Foxnews.com, writing an opinion piece on Governor Christie, "That is also why he is proposing a 2.5% annual cap on property tax increases and on municipal spending going forward; if legislators want to impose a heftier rise, they will have to get approval from the voters. And, that is also why he is going after public employee unions, and most specifically the teachers’ union. New Jersey is not the only state that has given away its future to pay generous pensions and benefits for its public service employees, but it is one of the first to challenge those contracts. Christie makes clear that it is not teachers who are the focus of his ire; it is their union. He has asked the union to accept a one-year pay freeze – not a cut – and to shoulder 1.5% of the cost of their very generous health benefits. Teachers in New Jersey get full medical, dental and vision care for themselves and their families at no expense. By contrast, as Christie points out, federal employees pay 25% of such costs."
These all seem like common sense decisions to me, and one that every city, county, state and yes even the federal government should consider undertaking. Governor Christie is right, at some point people can't pay any more, and cuts have to be made. There is waste at all levels of government and real leadership is looking for ways to cut that waste and enact long term reforms to ensure history doesn't repeat itself. Governor Christie has chosen a difficult path, but if he is successful, New Jersey will be a great shape for the long run.
This is the kind of leadership sorely needed at the federal level. As I've stated before, our debt situation is unsustainable. We need our leaders to be honest about that. Too many people don't understand how bad it is, because for the last 30 years, politicians have kept us focused on everything but our mounting debt. In my opinion, we are approaching a tipping point, and something will have to be done. Major changes will be needed, and more taxes aren't going to fix what ails us. Cuts are going to have to be made to all areas of the federal government, and these cuts will be difficult. The leader who finally has the guts to do what is necessary will be vilified by his/her opponents, but hopefully that person will have the fortitude to do what is necessary and set our country back on the path that made this the greatest country in the history of the world.
Movie Review: Memorial Day Weekend Movies
"Lie To Me" - 4 stars
I've been watching this series for several weeks now, and finally finished all 13 episodes. This is an interesting series, based on the science of "micro expressions." This stars Tim Roth as Dr. Cal Lightman, who has mastered reading micro expressions as a means for determining if someone is telling the truth or not. Lightman and crew use this talent to help several different federal, state and local agencies solve crimes, and occasionally they take an odd job here and there that makes the show more interesting.
"A Midsummer Night's Dream" - 3 StarsWe went to this one on Sunday night at the Englert Theater in Iowa City. The Englert is a neat old theater, and occasionally they show older movies. This incarnation of the Shakespeare classic stars Kevin Kline, Stanly Tucci, Michelle Pfieffer and several others. This wasn't a bad show...though I had low expectations. I could understand Shakespeare in High School, but it's more difficult now that I don't hear it very often.
"Up" - 4 Stars"Up" is a film I've wanted to watch for quite some time. I am a big fan of all things Pixar, so was very excited when this showed up on Netflix Instant Watching. The kids had seen this one before, but I hadn't. "Up" is funny, and heartwarming, as we see 78 year old curmudgeon Carl warm up to 8 year old Wilderness Scout Russell. The 2 heroes go on the adventure of a lifetime and Carl rediscovers what is important. If you are a Pixar fan, this is a must see, and even if you aren't, you should watch this one.
"Cloudy With A Chance of Meatballs" - 3 StarsThis is an entertaining movie, but not on the level of "Up" or some of the Pixar films. I found several funny parts in this movie, but overall it just didn't live up to "Up" which we had watched the previous night. Even with the vocal talents of Bruce Campbell, this couldn't climb above a 3 star level.
"Hitman" - 2 StarsWhy do people try to make movies out of video games? It never seems to work. This was not good, and didn't even come close to being good. It's like they tried to make a Bourne movie, but failed. I thought it had a chance because Timothy Olyphant is really good, but sadly, it missed the mark.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Socialism Explained
Recently, our favorite anonymous liberal commenter said the following on one of my blogs (I know who anonymous is, by the way, but since he/she wishes to remain anonymous, I will respect that):
"Most of the people who claim that Obama is leading us to the path to “socialism” can’t even tell you what it is or why it would be bad (I've tested this to great results)."
So, in an effort to educate the people, I'm going to explain why what Obama and Democrats are doing is leading us down the path to Socialism and why that is bad. In fairness, the Republicans haven't helped that much with stopping the Socialist path. But I'm going to focus on Obama since that was the crux of the commenter's beef. This blog will get very long...fair warning.
First off, we need to define Socialism. Merriam-Webster defines Socialism as follows:
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
I'm going to use that definition as my working definition. Now, let's take #1:
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
Since Obama was inaugurated the size and scope of government has grown. One of Obama's first action was to bailout General Motors and Chrysler, which were deemed "too big to fail." When Obama and Congress did the bailout, these 2 auto companies essentially became owned by the government.
With the economic bailout, Obama and crew took the opportunity to limit Executive Pay and bonuses for any companies that took bailouts...basically controlling wages for those companies.
Finally, with the recent health care legislation, Obama (a.k.a the Federal Government) took control of the health care industry. Sure, there isn't currently a government plan, but think about what we know. First, you have to buy health insurance or pay a fine, but the fine is less than some insurance costs. So, people will just pay the fine until they get sick. Then once they are sick, they will go buy insurance, which the insurance companies now have to provide, regardless of pre-existing conditions. This will inevitably cause insurance companies to go out of business, meaning that the federal government will "have to" provide a single payer plan.
Now onto #2:
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
This one is harder to talk about because we really haven't gotten their yet, at least for 2a. I think 2b is similar enough to #1 that I won't expand on that further.
So, for 2a, the best example of this I can think of is the offshore wind farm planned for Cape Cod. This has been under debate since 2001, and was opposed by the late Ted Kennedy. On April 30th of this year, the Obama administration just announced that they would go ahead with it, regardless of the challenges. Basically, the people living there have no rights, and the Administration is convinced that it will withstand legal challenges.
Like I say, 2a is the hardest case to make because this will take more time. But, with each "crisis" the Obama administration undertakes, the Federal Government gets more power. With the economic bailout, they could now control executive pay. With the auto bailout, they now control 2 auto companies. Next came the Wall Street reform where the Federal Government has more regulation powers. The Obama administration has also setup the Federal Government to back all student loans and mortgages. With each additional power grab that happens, it becomes harder to not imagine a day when the federal government no longer respects private property rights.
Let's go to #3:
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
Ok, this one is fairly easy. During the campaign, how was Obama going to pay for everything he wanted to do? By taxing everyone who makes over $250,000 a year. Basically, doing his best Robin Hood by "taking for those who have and giving to those who have not." Recently, he has made comments about, at some point, having enough money. These statements provide insight into this man's way of thinking. Furthermore, he is planning to let the Bush tax cuts expire, which will raise taxes on the producers in society.
You know, on the surface, this sounds good. Why can't the rich pay more taxes so that the poor can have more? There are 2 reasons for this:
1) There is only so much you can take from the rich before they get fed up and figure out how to hide money through tax loopholes.
2) If you follow the Socialist mentality to it's logical conclusion, you eliminate incentives for people to improve themselves. For example, if you could tax the rich enough and give enough to the poor to roughly equalize incomes, where's the incentive to reach your limits? Why would someone become a Doctor if they are going to make as much money as a short order cook?
Now, why is Socialism bad? Well, besides the reasons given above...because it doesn't work! Look at Europe...they have only managed to make it work as long as they have because they haven't had to pay for a military. They could count on the US to police the world, so they were able to promote a socialist society. But, even without the costs of a military, these countries are now collapsing...see Greece, Portugal and Spain. Socialism costs more than any government can afford. Our debt situation is already unsustainable...the US simply can't afford to become more Socialist than we already are.
So, that's my really long blog to explain why I believe Obama is leading us down a socialist path. In a court of law, some might say much of my evidence is circumstantial (see 2a for example), but I believe there is ample evidence to show that Obama and the Democrats are driving the United States to a Socialist model of government. I don't think this is good for our country, and a lot of people agree with me. This is why Obama's approval rating is down to 48 percent. I think it's probably lower than that, but so many people are afraid to answer negative against Obama for fear of seeming racist. That just my theory...I have no proof of that.
I'm not going to be as hard on people who don't understand exactly why Obama is a Socialist as our liberal commenter. I think there's a certain amount of common sense in play here. People know that the things that are going on aren't right, but maybe don't have the educated background to say exactly why. Hopefully a few of those people will read this blog and be able to more fully backup the gut feeling they have.
"Most of the people who claim that Obama is leading us to the path to “socialism” can’t even tell you what it is or why it would be bad (I've tested this to great results)."
So, in an effort to educate the people, I'm going to explain why what Obama and Democrats are doing is leading us down the path to Socialism and why that is bad. In fairness, the Republicans haven't helped that much with stopping the Socialist path. But I'm going to focus on Obama since that was the crux of the commenter's beef. This blog will get very long...fair warning.
First off, we need to define Socialism. Merriam-Webster defines Socialism as follows:
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
I'm going to use that definition as my working definition. Now, let's take #1:
1 : any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
Since Obama was inaugurated the size and scope of government has grown. One of Obama's first action was to bailout General Motors and Chrysler, which were deemed "too big to fail." When Obama and Congress did the bailout, these 2 auto companies essentially became owned by the government.
With the economic bailout, Obama and crew took the opportunity to limit Executive Pay and bonuses for any companies that took bailouts...basically controlling wages for those companies.
Finally, with the recent health care legislation, Obama (a.k.a the Federal Government) took control of the health care industry. Sure, there isn't currently a government plan, but think about what we know. First, you have to buy health insurance or pay a fine, but the fine is less than some insurance costs. So, people will just pay the fine until they get sick. Then once they are sick, they will go buy insurance, which the insurance companies now have to provide, regardless of pre-existing conditions. This will inevitably cause insurance companies to go out of business, meaning that the federal government will "have to" provide a single payer plan.
Now onto #2:
2 a : a system of society or group living in which there is no private property b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
This one is harder to talk about because we really haven't gotten their yet, at least for 2a. I think 2b is similar enough to #1 that I won't expand on that further.
So, for 2a, the best example of this I can think of is the offshore wind farm planned for Cape Cod. This has been under debate since 2001, and was opposed by the late Ted Kennedy. On April 30th of this year, the Obama administration just announced that they would go ahead with it, regardless of the challenges. Basically, the people living there have no rights, and the Administration is convinced that it will withstand legal challenges.
Like I say, 2a is the hardest case to make because this will take more time. But, with each "crisis" the Obama administration undertakes, the Federal Government gets more power. With the economic bailout, they could now control executive pay. With the auto bailout, they now control 2 auto companies. Next came the Wall Street reform where the Federal Government has more regulation powers. The Obama administration has also setup the Federal Government to back all student loans and mortgages. With each additional power grab that happens, it becomes harder to not imagine a day when the federal government no longer respects private property rights.
Let's go to #3:
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done
Ok, this one is fairly easy. During the campaign, how was Obama going to pay for everything he wanted to do? By taxing everyone who makes over $250,000 a year. Basically, doing his best Robin Hood by "taking for those who have and giving to those who have not." Recently, he has made comments about, at some point, having enough money. These statements provide insight into this man's way of thinking. Furthermore, he is planning to let the Bush tax cuts expire, which will raise taxes on the producers in society.
You know, on the surface, this sounds good. Why can't the rich pay more taxes so that the poor can have more? There are 2 reasons for this:
1) There is only so much you can take from the rich before they get fed up and figure out how to hide money through tax loopholes.
2) If you follow the Socialist mentality to it's logical conclusion, you eliminate incentives for people to improve themselves. For example, if you could tax the rich enough and give enough to the poor to roughly equalize incomes, where's the incentive to reach your limits? Why would someone become a Doctor if they are going to make as much money as a short order cook?
Now, why is Socialism bad? Well, besides the reasons given above...because it doesn't work! Look at Europe...they have only managed to make it work as long as they have because they haven't had to pay for a military. They could count on the US to police the world, so they were able to promote a socialist society. But, even without the costs of a military, these countries are now collapsing...see Greece, Portugal and Spain. Socialism costs more than any government can afford. Our debt situation is already unsustainable...the US simply can't afford to become more Socialist than we already are.
So, that's my really long blog to explain why I believe Obama is leading us down a socialist path. In a court of law, some might say much of my evidence is circumstantial (see 2a for example), but I believe there is ample evidence to show that Obama and the Democrats are driving the United States to a Socialist model of government. I don't think this is good for our country, and a lot of people agree with me. This is why Obama's approval rating is down to 48 percent. I think it's probably lower than that, but so many people are afraid to answer negative against Obama for fear of seeming racist. That just my theory...I have no proof of that.
I'm not going to be as hard on people who don't understand exactly why Obama is a Socialist as our liberal commenter. I think there's a certain amount of common sense in play here. People know that the things that are going on aren't right, but maybe don't have the educated background to say exactly why. Hopefully a few of those people will read this blog and be able to more fully backup the gut feeling they have.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
