Recently, the official US Government website, Whitehouse.gov, created a system through which registered users were encouraged to draft petitions, which could then be reviewed and signed by others from across the country. This petition system, titled “We the People,” has drawn the attention of a significant portion of the internet community, due both to its promise of attention and guarantee to disappoint. Originally, it was stated that any petition which, within 30 days of its submission to the site, could garner 5,000 unique signatures from users across the country, would be reviewed and personally responded to by a representative of the Obama administration. This number was later changed to 25,000 when it became clear that there would be more site traffic than the administration had foreseen.

Last week, President Obama responded to the first of the petitions which had gained enough traction. The petition in question called for the immediate relief of debt for college students across the country, in the hopes that recent graduates could contribute more significantly to the economy by spending what free money they would then have. The response was lackluster. The administration has come forward with plans for an executive order which, though haughty in rhetoric, will likely save the average student less than $10 per month. My source: http://everydayliberty.com/news/?p=961

Since this first response, four more have been issued pertaining to key issues of individual liberty and constitutional justice.

In response to a petition demanding the legalization and regulation of marijuana and other cannabis products, Obama released a statement full of what I may dare to call, though my writing would suffer for it, utter BS. Using age-old propaganda techniques of fear-mongering and false science, the president gives a resounding “no” to any who would call for equality under the law of all potentially dangerous substances. The only, and I repeat, only reason marijuana is illegal in the United States is that William Randolph Hearst ran a smear campaign to keep his lumber industry intact. Our country’s fear of marijuana is only greater than its fear of cigarettes or alcohol because our society has been lied to for generations.

In response to a petitions requesting the removal of “In God We Trust” from our nation’s currency, and “One Nation, Under God” from the Pledge of Allegience, Obama declared that, “A sense of proportion should also guide those who police the boundaries between church and state. Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation – context matters.”

Yes, Mr. President, context does matter. Would it be news to you to hear that “One Nation, Under God” was originally added to the Pledge in the 1950s, as a form of propaganda against the alleged “godlessness” of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics? Under this context, we can plainly see that the use of religion in the public sphere is a powerful weapon of nationalism and imperial values. This is not even to begin to mention the President’s (and, to be fair, all previous presidents’) blatant ignorance of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. The argument, as it stands, for Obama’s position, is that including the phrases in our Pledge and on our currency represent the various important roles religions from across the world have played in America’s history. Well, alright, I’ll give you that. Religions have been important historically. In fact, I seem to recall something about “witches” being burned at the stake in Massachusetts in the name of religion. Is that what you meant? Or perhaps you meant important in the sense that your predecessor, George W., cited a personal relationship with Yahweh as justification for the occupation of a sovereign nation not interfering with life on US soil.

I’ll make myself clear. To claim that “In God We Trust” and “One Nation, Under God” are not inherently contradictory to the legal premises of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, under which “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion,” is a display of utter ignorance and intellectual dishonesty. Both phrases are clear in their reference to the Christian God. Not Vishnu, not Thor, not Anubis, not Poseidon. By refusing this petition, President Obama is essentially saying that non-Christians and non-theists are, for all semantic purposes, un-American.

These are the three most important petitions the President has thus far responded to. There is no doubt in my mind he will continue to disappoint. Further, I see no reason why, in 2012, any self-respecting and/or self-proclaimed “liberal,” or “progressive,” or even “democrat,” should give Barack Obama their vote. Ask yourself, “what has Obama done for me?” This is not to say you should vote for the alternative. We all know how badly that would turn out. Instead, consider third party candidates. The Green Party has historically been equally if not moreso liberal than the Democrats.

To those who may say my proposal would split the vote, I say let it. If four more years of conservative “values” are what it takes to get the point across that we need a truly progressive president, I’m ready to bring on the Dark Ages. We endured eight years of Bush, and we’ve endured nearly a full term of his spiritual successor. What have we got to lose?