Obama Promised Change, but Picks Insiders Instead

reply to post by centurion1211


I'd just like to mention that McCain picked Sarah Palin as VP.

reply to post by intrepid



or "clintonistas"?

reply to post by centurion1211




"Alas, it's always with other people's money and other resources."

What is now happening with other people's money and other resources?

reply to post by sos37


Who are we to say another country can't use nuclear energy for electricity? We can do it without other countries invading us and telling us that we can't. I don't understand why we are policing the world. The human race will be the shortest lived species in history because of our greed.

reply to post by cognoscente


I think the reason "the big 3" are crashing is because of poor quality and the option of Americans to buy better quality automobiles from foreign countries. Here is how I see it. People were tired of buying crap from the American car manufacturers so they slumped. Now because they are in a slump we are basically forced to "buy" some product from them anyway through bailouts. Doesn't seem quite fair to me. Maybe we really do need some type of red dawn.

reply to post by botiemaster


"If democrats in this country desire their views and government programs to rule the land so badly, go take over a third world country or something and move there with your democracy/socialism, and leave America and her republic the hell alone."

Are you serious? Isn't one of the main problems here that the Bush administration is trying to take over third world countries and force democracy/socialism on them? Republicans and Democrats have been here since the founding of this country. It is the Democrats time to try their hand at things. It couldn't get any worse.

reply to post by FewWorldOrder



"There was ebonics, and now there is Obamics."

Are you f'ing kidding me? Ever take an ethics class? How bout reading the terms and conditions. Obama is president, get over it.

Originally posted by centurion1211
Obama Promised Change, but Picks Insiders Instead

He is doing the best he can. Unfortunately his choices among the GOP right now are profoundly limited. He will not appoint someone unqualified just to demonstrate he is picking from both sides of the isle. Most of the republicans in DC right now are frothing at the mouth and spouting off things ...I dunno..like saying Obama is Hitler...

Why try to pet a rabid dog?

That said he has appointed an all-star team thus far and I am very optimistic for his tenure in office.

Originally posted by maybereal11

Originally posted by centurion1211
Obama Promised Change, but Picks Insiders Instead

He is doing the best he can. Unfortunately his choices among the GOP right now are profoundly limited. He will not appoint someone unqualified just to demonstrate he is picking from both sides of the isle. Most of the republicans in DC right now are frothing at the mouth and spouting off things ...I dunno..like saying Obama is Hitler...

Why try to pet a rabid dog?

That said he has appointed an all-star team thus far and I am very optimistic for his tenure in office.

I agree, he's doing the best he can and I could care less if he picks a member of the GOP. It's just window dressing.

For some of the long time observers, the question does not lie so much with his choices, but whether Zbigniew Brzezinski was learned anything since his last administration with the sub driver. He had a few problems the first time around.

Secondly, how well will Obama perform with Zbig in one ear, the Clintons in the other, and his suppporters watching the whole enchilada, keyboards at the ready!! This gentleman will have his hands full. The best of luck to him. He's going to need it, even in the best of times.

Oh, and regarding the trying to pet a rabid dog comment, the only "rabid" folks I've seen around here, "frothing at the mouth and spouting off things...." are carrying "NO on 8" signs and pushing around an old lady clutching her cross.

As far as the All-Star team goes, that remains to be seen. Good luck to those folks too.

Originally posted by spooklight
reply to post by sos37

 

Who are we to say another country can't use nuclear energy for electricity? We can do it without other countries invading us and telling us that we can't. I don't understand why we are policing the world. The human race will be the shortest lived species in history because of our greed.

We're not saying that at all. We're saying we don't trust Ahmadinejad when he says he's developing nuclear material to construct reactors. We have several good reasons not to trust him:

1. The man has said that he believes he was born to wipe out the nation of Israel
2. Russia already offered to assist Iran by building nuclear reactors that would offer power to civilians. This was an effort to diffuse the tense international situation. Remember when the admitted that they were going forward with their enrichment program, they were offered many incentive packages to halt their enrichment program. The U.S. even put forward a couple of those packages! Iran declined Russia's offer and all of the incentive packages.

Given those facts, how do you expect anyone to trust what Ahmadinejad says?

Originally posted by Oldnslo

Originally posted by maybereal11

Originally posted by centurion1211
Obama Promised Change, but Picks Insiders Instead

He is doing the best he can. Unfortunately his choices among the GOP right now are profoundly limited. He will not appoint someone unqualified just to demonstrate he is picking from both sides of the isle. Most of the republicans in DC right now are frothing at the mouth and spouting off things ...I dunno..like saying Obama is Hitler...

Why try to pet a rabid dog?

That said he has appointed an all-star team thus far and I am very optimistic for his tenure in office.

.....Oh, and regarding the trying to pet a rabid dog comment, the only "rabid" folks I've seen around here, "frothing at the mouth and spouting off things...." are carrying "NO on 8" signs and pushing around an old lady clutching her cross.

Well none of those protesters are vying for cabinet appointments are they?

By "rabid dog" I was referring to the portion of the GOP in Washington DC and yes, the idiot Rep. Broun likened Obama to Hitler and Rep. Michele Bachmann claimed that Barack Obama and his wife Michelle held anti-American views and couldn't be trusted in the White House. She even called for the major newspapers of the country to investigate other members of Congress to "find out if they are pro-America or anti-America."

I am just saying in a time where bipartisanship is needed there is a segment of the GOP that hasn't made it easy for Pres. Elect Obama to find and appoint moderate republicans. The party has been pandering to the far right for too long.

So two families (Bush and Clintons) at the power for 20 years or so, and when people start to realize they dont really have a choice between something else, they put Obama up for election and Clintons rule by Proxy instead.

Clever bastards, arent they...

George Bush : 1989-1993
Bill Clinton : 1993-2001
George W. Bush : 2001-2009
Clinton (Obama Proxy): 2009-2017

Nice democracy.

[edit on 25-11-2008 by Copernicus]

One of the very critical positions that everyone over looks is Sec of Ag. If Michael Pollan gets the post we have a chance. If a Cargill or Monsanto puppet like Dennis Wolff
gets the position we are going to be looking at more food poisoning and famine.

Lee said "Dennis Wolff is a terrible person for that job, he told me right to my face that he wants NAIS and he would get it, regardless of what the people want" (NAIS was written by a Cargill VP)

Sounds like the guy believes in a representative government doesn't he.

Check out Michael Pollan at www.michaelpollan.com...

There is a petition at pollan4ag.blogspot.com...

Or the Obama's "change rural gov" at: www.change.gov...

I am a Capitalist/Libertarian so my pushing for a diehard socialist is rather amusing. But at least Pollan is NOT going to intentionally poison or starve people.

If Obama blows this we are in a world of hurt because some places are already passing laws making it illegal to grow veggies for human consumption!!!! Farmers I have talked to are planning on bailing out depending on what happens in the USDA in January.

Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer, at a recent food aid conference, says his agency faces tough decisions about managing the rest of the reserve in times of widespread hunger. "How far do we draw down?" he asked

the "i told you so" stickers are in the mail.

There should be IQ tests before you vote on the electronic voting machines.
too little too late

reply to post by Cio88


I think this is a great deal of nitpicking by the far right peanut gallery.

Overall the consensus seems to be he is assembling a diverse and all-star cast.

Even Rahm Emanuel...Don't take my word for it, take the GOPs..
www.abovetopsecret.com...

You would think for such an important job, these elected officials would have put a great deal of time into who they want working with them in Washington.

BO already plans for more huge bailouts and stimulus deals, and was agreeing with Bush the other day for somthing. After all that talk about bad Bush policies.

I dont know whats worse, having a president everyone mocks on TV and media, or one that everyone follows and defends so blindly.

We're not saying that at all. We're saying we don't trust Ahmadinejad when he says he's developing nuclear material to construct reactors. We have several good reasons not to trust him:

Like?

1. The man has said that he believes he was born to wipe out the nation of Israel

Never heard that one before... Do you have a link?

2. Russia already offered to assist Iran by building nuclear reactors that would offer power to civilians. This was an effort to diffuse the tense international situation. Remember when the admitted that they were going forward with their enrichment program, they were offered many incentive packages to halt their enrichment program. The U.S. even put forward a couple of those packages! Iran declined Russia's offer and all of the incentive packages.

Iran has considerable and easily mined uranium reserves, upwards of 10 mines with just one mine having proven reserves of close to 1000 tons of uranium.

It seems silly that a country with such vast reserves should import their enriched uranium. That would be like Saudi Arabia having to shut down oil production and only be allowed to import oil.

Throughout the iranian civilian atomic program, Iran has been a game piece to other countries. At first they agreed to ímport as they didn't have the facilities to enrich. That lead to a situation where they would get some from Russi, then from India, then from France or Germany etc. They never knew where it would come from next as they were at the mercy of the US and the international community.

It makes perfect sense that they want to mine and enrich their own uranium

Given those facts, how do you expect anyone to trust what Ahmadinejad says?

Ahmadinejad is not Iran. In fact, he doesn't control the armed forces, nor does he control the atomic energy program. Iran has offered the IAEA to make Natanz a multinational fuel center with with private and public foreign companies involved and under strict supervision by the IAEA.

reply to post by aaa2500


FYI - this thread is not about iran. This thread is about whether Obama really represents change, as his campaign slogans promised. The question arises due to his cabinet choices, which are basically clintonistas, and/or old-style democrats that Obama is "rehabilitating".

Reminds me of one of my favorite Obama jokes that has relevance to several threads here:

Seems Obama must be a messiah as some have said, since he has succeeded in raising Tom Daschle from the dead.

Originally posted by centurion1211
reply to post by aaa2500

 

FYI - this thread is not about iran.

I know that, and although Iran seems to be off topic, it is actually very relevant to the topic.

This thread is about whether Obama really represents change, as his campaign slogans promised. The question arises due to his cabinet choices, which are basically clintonistas, and/or old-style democrats that Obama is "rehabilitating".

I see the change as being not about people, but rather the principles that guide the people in charge.

Bush let his administration run amok in a conservative deficitspending massmurdering festival, apointing unqualified people to important posts based on loyalty alone and didn't care because he likes power and likes to wield it, in iraq for example. He just didn't care about breaking the law, killing people, turturing people, violating the constitution etc, he just didn't care.

The change will be Obama running a tight ship where people are appointed based on qualifications, with a long term focus towards an economic surplus, won't use his power just to use it, a respect and uphold the law and the principles the US should stand for.

Granted, Obama will still let the CIA run loose, so he will end up with his hands dirty and lives on his conscience.

reply to post by nyk537
are you a seer? Did you vote for Bush?