His Voice: Obama, followers are no moderates
by Joe Vieira / Submitted to the Tracy Press
Sep 06, 2012 | 899 views | 0 0 comments | 8 8 recommendations | email to a friend | print
In an op-ed earlier this year in the Tracy Press, a writer called President Barack Obama a moderate (“Santorum nomination would give voters clear choice,” Roger Adhikari, March 3).

Obama is anything but moderate — he gives executive orders bypassing Congress like no one. His health care plan forces taxpayers to pay for other people’s contraceptives. It’s like paying for someone’s ticket to a concert while you wait outside.

I took responsibility for myself, and now that I am retired, Obama is making it my responsibility to look after other people’s affairs. He is no moderate.

It will also force religious organizations to purchase insurance that contradicts their moral beliefs. If he cannot get Congressional approval, he does it on his own. Moderate?

Here is some of what was said by this writer: He said tea party people “want to break the separation of church and state, which has been the bedrock of our democracy since the founding of the country.”

Doesn’t the U.S. Constitution guarantee the right to freely express our views and beliefs, including religion, without government interference? While the writer wrote about the separation of church and state, I couldn’t even find the word “church” in the Constitution. But I did find the word “religion,” which has a different meaning. Church is a building for worship, a body of Christian people etc. Religion is any specific system of beliefs — just like yours and mine — regardless of what you believe in or where and how it was acquired.

The Constitution states that Congress shall not prohibit the free exercise of religion. My interpretation is, I have the same rights to infuse my beliefs into government as anyone else. Congress makes laws while in session; you and I make laws at the voting booth. And I have the same rights when I walk through the church doors on my way to worship as I do at a City Council meeting. This is what I call the bedrock of democracy.

The government has an obligation to protect religion freedom, but no right to exclude it.

“Republicans need to put up or shut up,” the writer continued. Really? Should freedom of speech exclude Republicans? Doesn’t this go against First Amendment rights? I am not a registered Republican or Democrat, but I would fight for their right to free expression, as I would for anyone.

The tea party wants to dramatically cut government spending. It’s for a good reason. The national debt is more than $15.5 trillion dollars, $137,000 for every taxpayer and $50,000 for every man, woman and child. At $100 million per day (without interest), it would take about 400 years to pay off the debt — hardly in the best interest of my grandchildren and their future descendents. And the federal government is borrowing about $4,000 per second. Where will it end?

Irresponsibility among the voters and our elected officials has brought us to the brink of disaster. No doubt, the U.S. will soon experience what Greece is facing.

Someday, you may have to tell your children and grandchildren that our national debt is a token of our greedy and irresponsible reckless spending, that our debt is now theirs.

We might well be the first generation that will leave the next in worst shape than the previous, and it’s nothing to be proud about.

• Joe Vieira is a Tracy resident.

Comments-icon Post a Comment
No Comments Yet

We encourage readers to share online comments in this forum, but please keep them respectful and constructive. This is not a space for personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs. Comments that stray from the topic of the story or are found to contain abusive language are subject to removal at the Press’ discretion, and the writer responsible will be subject to being blocked from making further comments and have their past comments deleted. Readers may report inappropriate comments by e-mailing the editor at tpnews@tracypress.com.