Continuing on with a freedom-and-cost-based analysis of B. Hussein's issues, since I couldn't find one, and needed to set out clearly why Obama is bad for (working) America.| Category | Costs | Who Pays | Who Benefits |
| Civil Rights | |||
| Hate crimes | Justice: crimes against so-called minorities will get harsher punishment than the same crime against a non-minority; freedom of speech: people will fear to express their opinions (e.g. against homosexuality) because those opinions are now "hate crimes". | Anyone with anti-establishment or anti-popular views (this would legitimize juror bias). Hate crime laws are bogus: they give license for witch-hunts against thoughtcrime, no matter who controls the government. It is the act, not the thought, that should be punished. | Minorities; liberals; dictators. |
| End deceptive voting practice | Probably code to spend federal money to print voting pamphlets in more languages (learn English!) | English-speaking taxpayers. | Illegal voters and anchor babies, or legal immigrants that refuse to learn English (and this would be a disincentive). |
| End racial profiling | Security. Over-sensitive political correctness will stop police and airport security from doing their work. A dilapidated car cruising an expensive neighborhood driven by someone out of the demographic probably is up to no good, but now stopping them to ask a few questions will no longer be allowed. I'll trust that police who have been patrolling a neighborhood for decades have good instincts about who shouldn't be there, and not tie their hands. Furthermore, it's not white grandmothers that are trying to blow up airplanes; it's middle-aged Arab men, and profiling saves lives. | Travellers, law-abiding citizens. | Terrorists. |
| Reduce drug sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. | Security. I have it on good authority that crack is a worse drug: so why shouldn't worse be punished more? | Law-abiding citizens. | Illegal drug users. If minorities are the ones using crack cocaine, as Barack alleges, wouldn't the better solution be for them to stop using it? |
| Expand drug courts | More drug offenders on the streets. The heading sounds good, but he actually means that he wants to keep drug offenders out of jail and on the streets. Oh boy, can we? | " | Illegal drug users. |
| Affirmative action | Businesses will have to hire minorities over qualified applicants; this is simple racism/sexism. Didn't someone famous once wish that "[his] children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character"? | Businesses, qualified applicants. | Minorities. |
| Disabilities | |||
| Provide Americans with disabilities with the educational opportunities they need to succeed. | Probably weasel words meaning he wants other people to pay for said education. I'm not against giving some help to those that truly need it, but the help should be (a) voluntary, which means that (b) I (or an organization that I trust and give money to) can judge need, not some government bureaucrat with too many applications and too little time. |
Taxpayers. | Disabled people—and anyone who can trick the government, which isn't known for its discernment. |
| Support independent, community-based living for Americans with disabilities. | Although he doesn't say it explicitly, I'd imagine what he means is to pay for this "community living" using my taxes. It's expensive enough to pay for my own housing, let alone everyone else's. | " | " |
| Increase the employment rate of workers with disabilities. | Unless he just means to go and encourage them to apply for jobs rather than relying on government handouts (which would be great), it hints of affirmative action, for which see above, substituting disability for race. | Qualified workers, businesses. | Unqualified workers. |