Friday, October 31, 2008

Letter from 2012 in Obama’s America

Focus on the Family has gotten a bit of grief from the Left regarding their Letter from 2012 in Obama’s America. Some have called it hate mongering. Others call it fear mongering. Whatever you think, it does make interesting reading.

If you're not familiar with the 16-page document, it is a fictional letter written in 2012 explaining the changes that took place in the USA after Senator Obama's election to the presidency. In this what-if scenario we have an insight into what could happen should Senator Obama be elected on Tuesday.

Now, it is a what if scenario. A big part of the letter relies on President Obama making three Supreme Court appointments in the first year. That is unlikely, but I suppose it could happen. It is also based on the Democrats getting a super majority not only in the Senate and Congress but in most state houses as well. This, I think, is more likely. Should Senator Obama carry the day on November 4th, I think a super majority of Democrats will ride in on his coattails. We would probably also see key propositions on stem cell research, euthanasia, and gay marriage in states like Michigan, California, and Washington pass.

I do believe that my life personally will change drastically should an Obama presidency, an overwhelming Democratic majority, and liberal Supreme Court appointments become a reality. First, Rob is self employed and so our tax burden is heavy (we pay double the Social Security tax). I believe that in this what if situation, our tax burden will become even heavier. But then that doesn't really matter as Rob would probably lose his clients. You see, his life's work has been educational choice and reform In recent years, his work has been with charter schools. I guarantee you, the dissolution of alternative schools will take place in such a scenario. Competition with public schools will not be tolerated. On a personal level, Rob will be overtaxed at best -- out of work at worst. Either way, we could lose our house and definitely our standard of living.

Then there is homeschooling. Here in Michigan, Democrats have been pushing for more regulations of homeschooling. Fortunately, so far, HSLDA has kept them at bay. I doubt they'll be able to keep it up under an Obama administration. I don't think it's all that crazy to envision homeschoolers going underground as we did back in the 1970's.

We will also be effected health wise. I have children with serious medical issues who have benefited from the so-called greedy pharmaceutical companies. As long as pharmaceutical companies can earn a profit from R&D (research and development) they will continue to develop new, life saving and life changing medications. My asthmatic son's life changed for the better when Advair came out. We went from six to seven ER visits a year to none. My son with hypopituatarian dwarfism would be destined for a life as a dwarf with the corresponding health issues if not for the discovery of artificial growth hormone. I say God bless the greedy pharmaceutical companies. But in our what if scenario, socialized medicine is in our future. Ask yourself how many new medical discoveries are coming out of Canada and other countries where medical care is taken on by the government.

As pro-life activists, our work will really begin. Senator Obama has declared that his very first act as president will be to sign the Freedom of Choice Act (FOCA). This far-reaching act will undo all of our hard work of the past.

These are only a few ways my family life will change should Senator Obama become President Obama.

Focus on the Family's Letter from 2012 in Obama’s America does make for an interesting read. Check it out for yourself and make your decision on how on or off the mark it is.


Anonymous said...

Obviously, this was a worst case scenario. I don't think all of that will be done in 4 years. I think, like all politicians, he will want to have 8 years in the White House (will it be renamed, after all White House is sooo racist). I think he could get a little bit done and does more if he wins a second term or his last months in the case he doesn't win a second term.
I don't think Obama will be the end of civility in our nation by itself. I believe he will open doors for his predecessors that we may be unable to close. Notice how the Left works. They are major re-education people, pushing a little more and a little more, and then pouncing once they think they can. Thought the homosexual lobby is really pushing fast- what an impatient lot they are.
I do get chills up my back thinking about the Brave New World and wondering if things got bad enough would we leave? Could we leave? As one book pointed out, if the US becomes socialist, we will be like all the other countries of the world. Are there truly any nations remaining democratic and not moving toward socialism or some other form of the people submitting to the will of their "betters"?
I am so nervous about Tuesday. Waiting is worse than knowing. And to make it worse, I am pregnant, so I am going to be an emotional wreck until Tuesday.

M.E. said...

As Ronald Reagan said, if freedom fails in American, we have nowhere to go. We are the last best hope of the world.

Maureen, I agree with everything you said. Yes, things will change, terribly, if Obama is elected.

And I also agree with you about "Big Pharm" -- for the past year I've been telling people, "Thank God for the big pharmaceutical companies!" They've provided life-changing meds that have helped my Dad tremendously.

I have some thoughts posted on my blog about what we can do in this last weekend before the election, besides just worrying. We can't give in to despair or fear; we have to keep praying!

Anonymous said...

I imagine your shooting sports kids will be affected too. Sweeping gun control would probably happen too.

Anonymous said...

Maureen, I honestly think your taxes will go down (I'm guessing you earn less than $250K a year as a family,) that your health care will improve, and that your right to homeschool will remain unaffected. I also very truly believe abortion rates will decline under an Obama presidency. The two things that correlate most strongly with low abortion rates are: 1) availability of contraception, and 2) comprehensive sex education. The Netherlands has much, much lower abortion rates (in fact, the lowest abortion rates in the world) than any country in which abortion is illegal (women in those countries have illegal abortions anyway.) The Netherlands also has the highest average age of onset of sexual activity, so their teens are behaving relatively responsibly. I don't think we can criminalize abortion -- the will isn't there and it doesn't work anyway. There are many things we can do, however, to reduce abortion. Please don't despair.

Maureen said...

Not to worry Anonymous I won't despair, even if the worst case scenario plays itself out. That's the cool thing about being a Christian, there is always hope.

This isn't a debate forum so we'll just agree to disagree on all of your points.

Anonymous said...

If you think you can increase spending by a trillion dollars, cut taxes for people making under $250,000, give rebates to those who don't pay taxes, and balance the budget, you're going to have to have enormous tax increases on people making over $250,000.

How do you think you're going to get better health care if this happens? Why will doctors provide you with quality health care when they have such a heavy tax burden?

Fewer people will go into medicine when you promise to suck away half their income on top of repaying student loans, paying staff, paying malpractice insurance, etc.

Anonymous said...


The relevant comparison is not which "enlightened" nation, that legally authorizes the killing of their own unborn kind, has the lowest rate of killing. The comparison is in the countries that have thrown off this moral and legal abomination.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, Poland was freed from communist rule and from legal abortion. It's strongly Catholic parliament voted to make abortion illegal again except to save the life of the mother. All sorts of catastrophes to women and their health were predicted by abortion adherents. None of them came to be. In fact, the rates of spontaneous miscarriage has dropped because women's wombs are not being routinely invaded by abortion. Now some women surely leave Poland to have abortions in other European countries, but the data do not indicate that waves of women travel for abortions and there has been virtually no crisis in women's health. The point is that abortion can be made illegal and the sky will not fall.

But arguing the nitty-gritty of the Netherlands v. Poland or the "political will" in the U.S. is not the point - that is a distraction. Anyone wanting to get caught up in "fact" debate how whose policies will reduce abortion more, or accepting that "abortions will happen anyway" is missing a foundational understanding of morality and justice.

Imagine the U.S. Supreme Court had issued a ruling saying that the disciplining of children is a matter of privacy within the family, and even if children are physically abused in that discipline, that is a decision between a mother and a father. Now child abuse is always going to happen, so our focus should be to "reduce the incidence" of child abuse with good social and economic policies. Hence, imagine a candidate who says, "I'm personally opposed to child abuse. I want to reduce child abuse as much as possible, but I support the Supreme Court's ruling and I will always appoint Justices who will uphold the privacy right to child abuse."

Such a position would be preposterous and NO ONE would endorse or vote for that candidate. Abortion is beyond child abuse - it is child killing. A candidate who is committed to maintaining the legal status of child killing - when that same candidate would never stand for legalized child abuse - is morally bankrupt. Should this nation have tried to "reduce the incidence" of slavery, or were we moraly compelled to make it illegal?

One cannot legitimately claim to want to promote morality and justice (for I ask, "What is just about abortion?") while at the same time endorsing some one who is not only tolerant of, but COMMITTTED to, keeping an unjust and immoral legal framework in place. If you would not vote for a candidate who would defend child abuse or slavery, nor can you support one committed to preserving Roe v. Wade and legal abortion.

Killing one's own offspring is outside the laws of nature, morality and spirituality. If you support one who preserves and sustains something outside these laws, you are complicit in the perpetration of this disorder.

Anonymous said...

I want to respect Maureen's comment that this is not a debate forum, but also to repond:

Rob, our economy is currently in crisis. We were facing a second Great Depression until the taxpayer-funded "bailout." Obama is economically a centrist and many respected economists (e.g., Greenspan) are admitting the previous system was flawed, and that Obama's plans to reduce taxes for the middle class, raise them somewhat on the wealthy, and build infrastructure are sound within current experience and understandings.

Ed, how can it be wrong not to introduce measures that would reduce abortion rates (one of Obama's stated goals)? A recent Lancet study suggested that contraception is the best way to do this. Comprehensive sex education has also been shown to be effective. People fundamentally disagree on whether or not full personhood starts at conception. The majority do not want to criminalize abortion. Maybe they're wrong, but we can't override their votes. We can only work to change minds and hearts and, within the current climate, let's at least work to *reduce* it.

Anonymous said...

That Prolife Obama view is all over the site. It's based on social justice -- since he's going to take care of the poor so well (yea, that $500 check is going to be a real life-changer), women won't be so inclined to abort. Of course, in Sweden they have a vast welfare state, and their abortion level is higher than ours. So that doesn't quite wash. There are some really insidious sites out there painting him as so compassionate, prolife, and Christian, just to appeal to the large number of Catholic Democrats. Latest poll here in Calif shows 62% of the Cath vote going to Obama, so it's clearly working. Don't they understand that the Democrat party left them a long time ago?? It's now a culture of death party, and that's not who we are.

Anonymous said...

What the blogger said about the Netherlands having such a low
abortion rate isn't accurate. I remember reading in a newsletter from HLI that most of their abortions are the very early (morning after) kind, and that they aren't counted in the statistics. I don't have time to re-check with HLI, but I am willing to bet they are right.

Anonymous said...

I'll be honest. Given the kind of wisdom we're called to pursue in seeking Christ, I think calling Focus on the Family's letter just an "interesting read" doesn't capture the gravity of what Dobson said.

The letter was, essentially, a hack-job intended to incite fear in evangelicals considering voting for Obama; which made his comment at the beginning of the letter about mutual respect sound laughable. I was shocked and ashamed by the slander in the letter, and I decided to more pro-actively address my shock by writing my own letter along the same lines.

For those interesting in reading my letter, the link is this;

Nate Myers