To torture, or not to torture? That is the question. Well first of all, can you even call waterboarding or caterpillar torture, torture? No, no you can’t. People all over the world pay money to have their heads dunked in water at amusement parks. Or they dunk their heads in water for an apple at parties. All we did to the TERRORIST (key word) is dunk their head in the water for 20 seconds and then they were done, with a doctor right there too. The fact that some ACLU panel says waterboarding is torture is insane.

After Conservatives make that argument the liberals come up with some crap argument about WWII era Japan torture techniques. We did prosecute the Japanese for waterboarding, but the type of “waterboarding” they practiced was just a tad different. For example, they would fill a US soldier’s stomach with water. Then slam their stomach to make them regurgitate it. That’s different then dunking someone’s head in the water for 20 seconds. And these weren’t any terrorists; these were the very top few super bad guy terrorists, like the architects of 9/11 TERRORISTS. In the middle of the debate, Obama releases memos showing that we tortured them, but not the memos showing what we reaped from the beneficial interrogation sessions. According to multiple CIA directors and a former VP, what we reaped from waterboarding saved American lives and prevented the possibility of a West Coast attack. So, I ask the liberals of the world, what if your kid, spouse, parent, best friend, or relative was on the West Coast that day. What is there was even another attack and you were there. If you still wouldn’t want waterboarding to save your or your loved one’s life then please go get an intervention.

I was recently presented a multiplicity of video clips that showed how Obama is actually a socialist, and not a far left Democrat. Now how do I prove this? First, I looked up the definition of socialism in the Oxford computer dictionary, and I quote “a political and economic theory of social organization that advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” The thesaurus of the same Oxford source sites these words as synonymous with socialism: “leftism, welfarism; radicalism, progressivism, social democracy; communism, Marxism, labor movement”. Community as a whole, the only thing that the entire community belongs to is the Country, and as American’s we all belong to out Republican government, in which people vote to have politicians represent them. That is the definition of a Republican Government, so the “community as the whole” basically means the government. I am looking at this definition and I am thinking “Holy crap… That is Obama all the time”.

Firstly, “advocates that the means of production… should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole”. We have two places we can look at for this one, Cap-and-Trade and Production Tsars. C-a-T is the process through which the government says how much carbon you can produce, and if you want to produce more carbon you must pay the government, or buy another company’s carbon share. Why do companies need to produce carbon?, because carbon is a bi-product of production of everything we make! So, in essence the government is saying we can only produce a certain amount of things, then, we pay someone else so that we can continue being productive, a.k.a. advocating our production.

Next, Production Tsars. Now, if you don’t think this one sounds bad you are so far left wing I would prefer you not read my blog. These are the people that the Obama Admin. (and that the Bush Admin. proposed) would send to various companies to “monitor” them after the bailouts we have given them. So, the government is saying “Here take someone else’s money and spend it, but in turn, we will do this and this and that and regulate a few things and now you can’t do this or that… etc.”

Thirdly “advocates that the means of… distribution… should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole”. Everyone has heard of re-distribution of wealth. It has the same word in his policy and the definition of socialism. HELLO, is anyone making the connection here other than the opinion commentators on my favorite channel, FNC. Obama will take hard earned money from people who have jobs that are often quite important. I am tired of hearing “the person on the line is just as important as the CEO of the company!” That is not true at all. If the CEO makes a mistake the entire business can go down the tubes and go bankrupt while all the guys on the line lose their job. If the guy on the line makes a mistake “oh no a broken toy!”. The CEO’s job is much higher staked therefore the CEO should be paid more money.

Fourthly, “advocates that the means of… exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.” Once again, C-a-T. The Trade part of that between the companies in controlled by, guess who?, the government! Another exchange policy Obama is controlling is the buying of guns and ammunitions. Obama has suggested implementing a policy in which to buy a gun you would have to have an one million dollar insurance policy for the gun if it is “accidentally discharged and injures/kills someone, or if its purposefully shot and injures/kills someone”. There is not one, not one, insurance agency in ALL of America that will insure those situations. So, Obama’s goal? The ending of all gun ownership by Americans. The reason we were given a Constitutional Right to have guns is not to hunt, but to protect us from a tyrannical government like Obama’s. He is stripping us from our rights and money and this is why Obama is a Socialist.