When people spend more time debating about religion’s place in government, or even  whether or not the United States of America is considered a Christian nation or not (despite, say, the constitution not mentioning God, saying there can’t be a test for public offices, and a document outright saying it’s not a Christian nation), this time of year leads to one of the biggest controversies in a sense that people get all bent out of shape about:  “Happy Holidays” over “Merry Christmas”

Now when you really think about it, one has to wonder — exactly why is it that people complain?  In December there’s Chanukah (Hanukkah), Advent, New Years Eve, some even say Kwanzaa and Festivus, winter solstice — and Christmas (and probably a number more holidays). When someone says “happy holidays” they’re including every holiday in December, for every person and whatever beliefs they may have. When they say “Merry Christmas” they’re leaving out all the holidays but one. Yet people think that “happy holidays” is an attack against Christianity — when it’s really an attack on everything but Christianity.

Just as with everything in life, it’s all based on perceptions.

We make this comment now since the version we’re currently running is drastically different than the prior versions — and we’re needing to make sure everything’s working without too much of a problem.

So how many campaign promises will Obama discard, forget, or just outright say “I had no intention of doing it” (or in politician speak: “it’s important to realize that some things take time for adjustment and support to gain momentum”)? Some of them? All of them? Or better yet, given the different people, his own comments, the media/etc, do we even know what he stood for at the start? Or perhaps the best question of it all: is it even slightly surprising that he isn’t even put in office, yet he’s already going against things he said he was going to do (according to some of his supporters as well)?

To be honest, no one should even be slightly surprised. He’s a politician – and a good one. But that isn’t to say he’s a good ethical person, just that he knows how to manipulate the masses to get what he wants. As is the way of the political machine; politicians are the best manipulators of the crowd, at least in larger state-federal elections.

The big question on my mind isn’t why he’s not doing what he’d say he’d do (or so the reports say), but why is it that people are shocked or even reporting on it? Everyone knew, or should, that his campaign was the same as all the others: say whatever gets you elected, and be quick on your feet when you’re caught being on both sides.

It’s something that many people would be for: making sure all Americans have healthcare, and make sure businesses have to provide it — and kids have to have it too.

But if you think about it, you’ll realize that this has two very bad things that can happen if implemented as such:
1) Businesses have to pay double, triple or more to get health care for their workers than they’re currently paying — so they lay off half their workforce, or provide “healthcare” as in “you’re on your own unless dieing” (and still lay off 10-25%)
2) People working at the businesses will have the ability to have health care, but instead of being optional, $100-200 will be taken out from every paycheck, without a raise (so they’ll be making less money each month).
3) [potential] Parents will have to spend a $100-300/paycheck that they currently don’t spend to also cover their kids, as they may eliminate free kids health care if businesses have to provide it.