From the Right: Voting for Obama too great a mistake to make
Published: Friday, November 2, 2012
Updated: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 15:02
The American university campus sits in the American subconscious as a place where young adults are supposed to make mistakes, try new things, and find themselves (whatever that means). Indeed, the American university is a place where underage drinking, sexual promiscuity, illicit drug use and public intoxication are so common that criticism of these practices has become passé. And yet, there’s one mistake that college students make again and again which is far more self-detrimental than trying marijuana: voting for shyster liberal politicians on the basis of frivolous social issues.
In the early months of this year, the Obama campaign and their small band of pathetic true believers attempted to swindle the youth vote for a second time using the rhetoric of hope and change. Unfortunately, 18 -25-year-olds just weren’t buying it … even after the campaign got cardboard cutouts of Barack and Michelle Obama! With one in every two recent college graduates unemployed and one in every four young adults moving back in with their parents, the idea that President Obama had kept his promise to the young supporters who put him in office was a pill too big for most college students to pop. Yes, it’s true that most college students don’t have a comprehensive understating of economics, but we know bad fiscal policy when we feel it.
President Obama’s ministry of public enlightenment has now resorted to the politics of fear. The president’s agenda for the next four years can be best summarized as, “let’s give it another go and see how it turns out.” So, naturally, the only way to retain his fleeing base is to frighten them into voting for him. Women: “Romney wants to take away abortion!” Gays: “Romney is a homophobe!” College Students: “Romney wants to take away financial aid!” The discourse of today’s Democratic Party might best be summarized as a series of scare tactics designed to keep their voters in line.
On the issue of abortion, the Obama campaign is constantly touting a fabricated war on women. Roe v. Wade, the average Obama voter seems to think, will be the first thing Romney “overturns” when he gets into office. Let’s ignore Civics 101, which would dictate that only the Supreme Court can overturn Roe v. Wade and that the most Romney could do is appoint justices who would be more sympathetic to seeing it overturned (no one seems to be interested in the fact that abortion would not be illegal even if the court did overturn Roe v. Wade, since it would then be a matter for the states to decide).
What Romney has said is that he wants to see Planned Parenthood defunded. This is a small price to pay for an organization which has repeatedly covered up incidents of sexual abuse and statutory rape while bullying a nonprofit cancer foundation for funding (see Susan G. Komen controversy). I think Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger put it best when she said, “Eugenics is … the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political and social problems.” Oops, wrong quote!
Sorry President Obama, being against taxpayer-funded contraception is a little different than being “anti-choice” or “anti-women.” You know what issue I think women would really be interested in talking about? Why, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the number of women out of work has increased by 15 percent since you took office … must be Bush’s fault.
As for the gays, I can tell you from firsthand experience that gays have a tendency to make everything about them. That’s why we now have a group of gay and lesbian Obama supporters attempting to guilt their heterosexual friends into voting for the president because, you know, Romney would make them second-class citizens! Yeah, okay. So Obama has a “sincere” (which I am beginning to think is a liberal code word for “politically convenient”) conversion on the issue of gay marriage in May and now anyone who votes for Romney is endorsing the mass exile of all homosexuals to Siberia? In what world does that work?
Sorry President Obama, the economy is bad for gays and lesbians too. Who among us would not prefer nice china at his commitment ceremony? I don’t mean to be flippant on this matter, but it is difficult for me to believe that the disproportionately successful and well-educated members of the gay community do not see the president’s “evolution” for what it is: shameless political pandering.
Finally, I keep hearing all these College Democrats talk about how inspiring the president is because, you know, we owe him so much for making more financial aid available for students. They’re right in one sense; President Obama has increased Pell Grants. For evidence of this, consider the fact that the average cost of tuition has increased by 25 percent since he took office.
You see, when the government subsidizes college education, the cost of tuition increases. Higher education is a bubble and when it pops, it will all depend upon how much the government is willing to pump into it and for how long. I won’t digress into how this contributes to the national debt.
To put it simply, if you are a college student today, the most important issue in this election should be the economy. If Mitt Romney is elected president on Tuesday, abortion will still be legal (Romney can’t do anything to change that and there will be resistance from within his own party if he ever does). Likewise, gay marriage will continue to become law state by state (Mitt Romney may be for traditional marriage, but he’s for federalism first). If these things sound good to you and you would like to have a job when you graduate, the choice is clear.
Nick Mignanelli is a senior political science major and a former intern at the Heritage Foundation.