Obama's "change" really means... change

• Some Obama campaign promises are put on hold as the economy sinks - sm
  • He keeps lowering the bar on expections, in hopes that people won't - be disappointed.
    • If you don't like the way Obama is - Stardust
      • the problem is that the stimulus checks are not... - Kendra
        • Well I work two jobs to make ends meet - stardust
    • Wanna talk about lowering the bar? - sm
      • Liberalism is alive and well - sm
    • That is because Obama is a phoney. - Some of us have seen it all along.nm
      • Can you quote something "phoney" Obama has said?n/m - Stardust
        • *95% of Americans are going to get a - tax cut*. . . . .Can't get
      • Who is President NOW, as the economy continues to sink? Who got us here? nm - period
        • In case you've forgotten.... - An obottie-
        • Who got is here - MTing
          • Your forgetting B. Franks, J. Kerry, N. Pelosi and - An obottie
      • Obama's "change" really means... change - however the wind blows.-no confidence in him.nm

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Obama is change you can believe in until you have to take it to the bank.

Our jobs have been offshored until now because of greed.  Under Obama and his taxation of small businesses, they will be offshored not because of greed but because of survival.  

You could make a difference for our country by not voting for Obama, but instead, if you vote for him, you are selling out to deception.  You are embracing a socialist, a communist, a Marxist, a liar, a cheat, and someone who legally cannot run as President of the U.S., much less the Illinois senate.  But, you make your choice.  You believe the consumate liar and his lies who sat for 20 years under the teachings of a black racist preacher filled with hatred for the U.S., whose association with Bill Ayers is recent and documented down to the fact that Ayers himself wrote Obama's best-selling book (best-selling in the eyes of far left liberals that is), who is a documented member of the socialist party, whose friends and close allies are extremists who not only bomb innocent people and are unrepenetent but who intend to eliminate (kill) 25 million Americans who they cannot "re-educate" in communist ideaology (gosh dog it, those dreadful capitalists), who refuses to hand over a certified copy of his birth certificate and educational records (my goodness, don't you have to provide your birth certificate to any number of entities who want to know if you are legal, i.e., social security, DMVs, etc., and your educational records would show if you had received aid as a foreigner and in 1963 would have shown you were a negro instead of an African-American which Obama's falsified record shows, please speck up on history), and who thinks Joe the Plumber is so stupid not to realize that if he wants to achieve the American dream, he is going to achieve it only if he lets Obama take what he makes to give to those WHO WILL NOT WORK.  I'd like to see you, liberals, give a share of your 7.5 cpl to those who don't work as hard as you, but then with Obama, that's what you will have to do.  Don't be fooled by his rhetoric that only those making over $250,00 will be taxed.  We will all be taxed, and there will be no incentive to work for any of us because we will all have to give up a piece of our pie so those who do not work can have a piece of our pie.

Here is the dividing line, folks.  We are at a crossroads in our history.  The Lord Jesus puts it this way, "Enter by the narrow gate; for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction; and there are many who go in by it."

Choose which gate you enter, the wide or the narrow.  It not only determines your eternal destination, but it determines the destination of this country.  If anyone here calls themself a Christian and can vote for Osambo, I daresay you are a liar and cheat just as he.  One cannot be a Christian and vote for a party and a political candidate who is in total rebellion to God's Word.  That is a fact, and if you think any differently, then you, too, like the Obamanation, call God a liar.  May He have mercy upon your soul.  As He makes the rain fall on the just and the unjust because He is no respector of persons, we will all suffer as this country is destroyed and our Constitution that guarantees our freedoms is trampled just as Bill Ayers is pictured standing upon our flag in total disrespect, and we will thank you liberals that we are all in bondage, reduced to third world status, just as the Israelites were in Egypt.  Only Obama ain't no Moses but a Muslim and has no favor with God, and there will be no one to lead us to the Promised Land coming from the Democratic party. 

Yeah - I know "everyone does it", but this was all supposed to stop under Obama, remember?  Lobbying and all of that?  Corrupting the system for bucks? 

Remember?

I do.  I also predicted Obama would be as bad as any of the rest of them.  Given his promises, though, he is much, much worse because he's a liar.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=adfv4RHV3Kmk

a slogan.  He is telling people what they want to hear.  People want change.  But his slogan of change is a false hope.

McCain's slogan of country first is real and he proves that by his service to our country.  It isn't just a slogan.  It is something he believes in and has proved that with his own broken body. 

Do you know that while McCain was a POW, there was a man who made a flag and they would say the pledge of allegiance every day.  These were men severely beaten, mistreated, wounded, and some dying who said the pledge to our flag every day.  Then you have Obama who didn't even put his hand over his heart during the national anthem. 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/27/politics/washingtonpost/main4388540.shtml

http://blog1.thejtandbearshow.com/2008/08/27/obama-rewarded-bidens-lobbyist-son-with-34-million-in-earmarks.aspx

By Tim Reid, The Times of London

Barack Obama's senior advisers have drawn up plans to lower expectations for his presidency if he wins next week's election, amid concerns that many of his euphoric supporters are harboring unrealistic hopes of what he can achieve.

The sudden financial crisis and the prospect of a deep and painful recession have increased the urgency inside the Obama team to bring people down to earth, after a campaign in which his soaring rhetoric and promises of "hope" and "change" are now confronted with the reality of a stricken economy.

One senior adviser told The Times that the first few weeks of the transition, immediately after the election, were critical, "so there's not a vast mood swing from exhilaration and euphoria to despair."

The aide said that Obama himself was the first to realize that expectations risked being inflated.

It used to be yes we can, now it's yes I can and I am the change.

http://www.bigmouthfrog.org/2008/11/27/obama-tells-supporters-i-am-the-change/

So much for a more transparent administration. It seems to be just more of politics as usual. So, Obama is having personnel problems already. He has not even been in office 3 weeks and now TWO of his cabinet members have tax problems? First it was Geithner who "forgot" he had to pay taxes plus had an illegal working for him. And now Tom Daschle??

   http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28958689

Hmmm...let me see...when I had "tax problems" it cost me that problem plus interest and fines. So, I guess if you are an Obama appointee, it doesn't matter whether you pay taxes or not. Gee......with all the problems in our economy, maybe I should get a job in Washington as an Obama appointee. In like Flynn in my opinion.

I am so glad I didn't drink the kool-aid.

OBAMA'S 'CHANGE': BACK TO THE DEMOCRATIC Washington INSIDERS

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN 

Published on DickMorris.com on November 7, 2008
Printer-Friendly Version
What's with Obama's choice of old-time Clinton cronies and recycled Washington insiders to run the transition to his new politics of change?

Can't the anti-Washington insiders President-elect find anyone who isn't a Beltway has-been?

Judging by the appointments to his transition committee and leaks about possible top staff and Cabinet choices, Obama appears to be practicing the politics of status quo, not the politics of change.

Obama based his innovative campaign on an emphatic and convincing commitment to change the culture of Washington and bring in new people, new ideas, and new ways of doing business.
 But now, Obama has definitely changed his tune. As president-elect, he's brought back the old Washington hacks, party regulars, and Clinton sycophants that he so frequently disparaged. Like Jimmy Carter, the last President who ran as an outsider, Obama has reached out to the same old folks who dominate the Democratic Party and represent the status quo.

His Transition Committee looks like a reunion of the Clinton Administration. No new ideas of how to reform the system there. The Chairman, John Podesta, was Clinton's Chief of Staff. He presided over the outrageous last minute pardons and his style is strictly inside-the-beltway and make-no-waves.

Then there's Carol Browner, Clinton's competent former EPA Administrator who became the consummate Washington insider. She's Madeline Albright's partner and recently married mega-lobbyist and former Congressman Tom Downey. During the uproar over Dubai taking over U.S. ports, Browner brought Downey to meet with Senator Chuck Schumer to plead Dubai's case. Downey was paid half a million dollars to push Dubai's position. He's also a lobbyist for Fannie Mae, paid half a million to try to cover their rears on the subprime mortgage mess. Is his change?

Federico Pena was Clinton's Secretary of Transportation and of Energy. The President felt he was unduly soft on Air Florida after their crash and lost confidence in him. Now he's back as a Transition Committee member.

Bill Daley, Clinton's former Secretary of Commerce and the brother of the Mayor of Chicago, is the epitome of the old Democratic establishment. Clinton appointed him to the Fannie Mae Board and his son worked as a lobbyist for the agency. Aren't these the kind of folks that Obama ran against?

Larry Summers, President of Harvard and former Clinton Secretary of the Treasury is not exactly an outsider either. He's also alienated more than a few with his bizarre suggestion that women may be genetically inferior to men in math and science.

Susan Rice, Assistant Secretary of State under Clinton advised John Kerry and Mike Dukakis. Does that tell you enough?

Obama has named one of his big bundlers - Michael Froman, an executive at Citigroup. Is this supposed to symbolize change? 
 
Obama's choice of a spokesperson for the transition is also surprising; hers' is definitely not the face of reason and new politics. Stephanie Cutter is the brash and combative former Clinton, Kerry, and Ted Kennedy mouthpiece. The liberal DailyKos.com once described Cutter as "a moron to the nth degree" when she tried unsuccessfully to force the New York Times' Adam Nagourney to treat her unsolicited email criticizing Howard Dean as "background" without mentioning her name.

Speaking of brash, Rahm Emmanuel, the new White House Chief of Staff, makes Cutter look timid. Rahm is also a former Clinton White House staffer - and a very obnoxious one. He spent his White House years leaking to the Washington Post whenever he didn't like what the President was doing.  Even Bill Clinton stopped trusting him. Any hopes of Obama keeping his commitment to reach across the aisle would go right out the window with Rahm's appointment.  Instead of extending a hand to the opposition, it would be like raising just one finger. And Rahm's strident demeanor laced with the 'f'  word in every sentence will do little to elevate the bipartisan dialogue in Washington.

Christopher Edley, another member of the transition team, is Dean of the Berkeley Law School. He's a former member of the U.S. Civil Rights Commission under Clinton and his wife, Maria Echaveste was Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff.

Transition committee staffer Christine Varney was a Federal Trade Commissioner under Clinton and worked in the White House.

Throughout the early debates, Obama criticized Hillary as part of the inside-the beltway establishment that needed to go. But now he's reaching out to these exact same folks.  Some change.

...Bush remains "The Decider."  The question is, will Bush leave when it's time, or will he hijack the country, declare martial law and promote himself to "The Dictator," which he "joked" about on three different occasions.  He also giggled about World War III, and he stated back in 1999 (TWO YEARS BEFORE 9/11) that if he ever had the chance to invade Iraq, he would.

"You don't get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier." Describing what it's like to be governor of Texas.
(Governing Magazine 7/98)

-- From Paul Begala's "Is Our Children Learning?"

"I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don't agree with each other, but that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator," Bush joked.

-- CNN.com, December 18, 2000

"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it, " [Bush] said.

-- Business Week, July 30, 2001

the stuff just mounts up.

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/09/15/top-us-communist-says-elect-obama-and-change-the-world/

And I wasn't the one who wrote the things you are responding to, but here is a really good definition of Neocon and perhaps you can see why AG and I and others have stridently objected to being labeled Neocon in the past.  Though I have some Neocon friends and I admire most of their beliefs, I am no Neocon.  Neither, for that matter, is President Bush, who has been labeled a neocon ad nauseum on these boards.

From Chris Jones:

It would appear that you are unfamiliar with the history of the neo-conservative movement, a history which explains why some folks associate it with Jews and why the use of “neo-con” as a pejorative seems to some to smell of anti-Semitism.

The original “neo-conservatives” were a group of left-of-center intellectuals who became disillusioned with their liberal politics and became conservatives — mostly, but not exclusively, on foreign policy and national security issues. Many, but not all, of these intellectuals were Jewish, and the “center of gravity” of the nascent neo-conservative movement was Commentary magazine and its editors and writers. Prominent among the early neo-conservatives were Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz (who are Jewish) and Jeanne Kirkpatrick (who is (I think) a Gentile). Commentary magazine played the role in the neo-conservative movement that was played by National Review in the broader conservative intellectual movement of the 1960s and 1970s.

The contemporary conservative journalists Bill Kristol and John Podhoretz are the sons of the early neo-conservatives Irving Kristol and Norman Podhoretz.

The defining characteristic of neo-conservatism, properly so called, is a belief in a robustly activist foreign policy by people who were formerly left-of-center. The movement is associated with Jewish-ness because many of its early leading lights happened to be Jews; but Jewish-ness is accidental to the movement, not characteristic of it. To use “neo-con” as a sort of vaguely anti-Semitic slur is not only dishonorable, but a misuse of language. That doesn’t mean that it doesn’t happen, though.