PI's contributors have made it clear, over the last few months, how they feel about a certain senator from Arizona becoming the country's next president. I find it hard to disagree. And yet, what would the consequences be of an Obama presidency? Is sitting out the election this year really the better option? Is one of the presumptive nominees a lesser of the two evils?
I think one of the writers over at Pajamas Media has a well-written answer to that question.
...Barack Obama, as I have painstakingly discovered, is no mere liberal. He proudly claims the progressive label, and makes no bones about his intentions to progress the internationalist socialist cause in America. In every policy sphere, from the redistribution of wealth to the federal government as nanny-caretaker, from an appeasement-first-and-always foreign policy to his plan for a national civilian security force on par with our U.S. military, Barack Obama clearly plans to change America into a country we would not even recognize as the land of the free and the home of the brave.
So, in my mind, Obama would not produce a train wreck, much less a “good” train wreck.
No, a Barack Obama presidency, coupled with a filibuster-proof Senate majority and a large House domination, is more akin to a Boeing 747 crash for America.
While folks do survive train wrecks and walk away to pick up the pieces and rebuild, surviving an Obama-style change jet crash, in my opinion, may not leave enough surviving elements of our Constitution, our economy, or our defense to allow for any sort of American renewal.
Read it all.