Obama Says Recession Requires Scaling Back Promises

America is not going to get any real 'change' until the masses stop voting for the 2 parties.

Democrat, Republican; it doesn't matter. They are both out to suck the country's coffers dry to line their own.

A change of system is the only change that can save the US in my opinion, and when so many of the population are fed their 'fair and balanced' information through FOX and CNN it isn't going to happen.

[edit on 13-1-2009 by fooffstarr]

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic


Here is a link to where Obama wanted out by the end of 2008:
www.monstersandcritics.com...

I remember watching Obama on TV and he made it sound like he would be out in six months! Later I think I went back and realized he meant start withdrawing after six months. I found that to be disappointing but he did say he would be out within a year, which I found to be just not trustworthy at all.

It seems he has since changed his story to withdraw way out into 2010. 2010! Even Bush could have done that given a third term give me a break, that is pathetic!

But even that is a lie. According to the infamous RAND corporation, which would no doubt know Obama's Iraq plans very well, stated his plan is to have up to 90,000 troops in Iraq after 16 months!
See: www.rand.org...

And regarding the constitution mentions, I see from your links that he in fact actually has mentions the constitution. With exception to the abortion issue however he simply mentions it in passing, not as a core issue.

And furthermore as the primary specific concerns as mostly brought up by conservatives don't seem to be mentioned. For example, I didn't see any place where he said that wars must be declared by congress before fought.

Also, one of the links you point out have him saying the constitution 'ties their hands', which although true seems like at best a neutral mention of it. I still think if you analyzed the debate transcripts from CNN and MSNBC you would find Obama mentions of the constitution as an issue in itself only after Ron Paul has mentioned it, and then later in the debates I'm betting that the mentions as an issue simply stop entirely. This is just something I noticed while watching the debates but you would really have to analyze the text carefully to know for sure.

If I had the time I would go through the transcripts for mentions of "constitution" but simply don't want to spend that time right now. Without going through them I know that Obama voted for the patriot act, meaning he doesn't care about the constitution. That is such a huge negative nothing Obama does short of changing his mind about it dramatically will ever change my opinion that he is constitutionally corrupt.

"Hey, there is an asteroid commin towards us, and will kill us within a few months, but if you elect me, I will stop that from happening, I promise"
....after the elction..
"Hey thanks for the votes, now lets get down to it schmucks, the asteroid is comming, and theres not a thing I can do about it, we are all gunna die, but dont I have a nice smile?"

reply to post by detachedindividual


i dont see how you can say this when half the world was on a downward spiral as he was running, hence how he came up with most of his speech material, on top of this the market had crashed like twice worse than the 1920's so i think its pretty fair to say he knew he was lying and banking on winning as being the first black/african american president, just another puppet get used to it, its not our america any more the bankers own us heck im 14 and even i can smell crap a mile away lol

Okay I've read through most of this entire thread and it's all "waaah Obama is for no change." He already has proposed some changes. I could name them for you if you like. He's a change from Bush! That's all the hope and change I need!

[edit on 13-1-2009 by Frankidealist35]

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
Okay I've read through most of this entire thread and it's all "waaah Obama is for no change." He already has proposed some changes. I could name them for you if you like. He's a change from Bush! That's all the hope and change I need!

[edit on 13-1-2009 by Frankidealist35]

Change:

From a president with an IQ and speech pronunciation consistency of a drunk out hill billy TO a flip floppin, chain smokin, telepromptin' robot with the policy making consistency of your typical pants- on-knees-sideways-cap-wearing n***a who says uuhhhh every 5 seconds on an impromptu interview?



Great job America!

reply to post by jibeho


LOL, My father is old enough to have worked before the social security tax was implimented, and before taxes were automatically taken out of your paycheck.. Every 3 months he used to have to pay his taxes... Just like a buisiness...

This automatic tax payment that is taken out of our paychecks every week has made it very easy for the govt. to keep taking more and more, not too many people notice an extra dollar taken out per week..

But, if every 3 months you had to come up with a third of your pay(for example) IE, one full months pay, then I think people might just start "squawking" about what is being done with it all....

I know 1/3 is a bit steep, but if you are single, claim 0, it is fairly close to it.. Now I know at the end of the year you might get a return, But still just add up what you make, gross pay, for one month, and that should be close to what the gov,t. takes from you every quarter..

Yes I know I over simplified it...But even at 20%-25% it is still a good chunk...

[edit on 13-1-2009 by SideWynder]

[edit on 13-1-2009 by SideWynder]

Originally posted by SkepticalSpectacle

Change:

From a president with an IQ and speech pronunciation consistency of a drunk out hill billy TO a flip floppin, chain smokin, telepromptin' robot with the policy making consistency of your typical pants- on-knees-sideways-cap-wearing n***a who says uuhhhh every 5 seconds on an impromptu interview?

Great job America!

I have actually heard that while bush jr was in college and in much of his career before he was lining up for bigger things he spoke quite well, you might even say competently. That being changed in so much as it has to develop a character that might resonate with the lower class or "average joe" so that even in being an idiot people would like him for being down to earth...if this is true than it seems not all plans work out as deviously successful as they are intended to....

reply to post by SideWynder


A good chunk? Dude thats much more....When you consider cost of living especially in Southern California (where I reside) The cost for pretty much anything is so high that the taxes stifle alot of ability to move up and out of the mire...

Originally posted by Intelearthling
This is the first good news I've heard this year.

If he can go back on his word and promises he made during his campaign, he may become a good president.

However, that's highly doubtful!

It should be against the law at how hard I'm laughing at everyone that vote for this "Havard graduate."

[edit on 12/1/09 by Intelearthling]

Believe it or not, that exactly what I've been thinking.

The economy, the middle east, etc., etc. and therefore obama will never get the opportunity to be the peace loving, tax raising, big spending liberal many here such as BH hoped they were electing.

He's already decided to do a (republican-style) tax cut, send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan (making it Obama's war), merge civilian NASA with the military (making it easier to weaponize space) and now he's casting a greedy eye on Social Security payments. Universal health care? No chance.

Two terms for obama? Also no chance. The baby boomers will switch their votes if he touches social security, and even his own race may disown him when he fails to pay their mortgages and energy bills as promised.

Some are already referring to obama as "carter II". I predict that in a few years, they'll be calling the next liberal president that tries this tactic "obama II".

reply to post by centurion1211




I love how you claim tax cuts as your own. How about deficit spending? That's definitely Republican as far as I can tell. How about nation building in countries that clearly don't want us there? That's definitely Republican.

Liberals have been the best at creating surplus and reducing deficit spending. Carter and Clinton easily destroyed any other president in the last 30 years in budgeting and minimizing the deficit.

Obama has ALWAYS said he would send more troops to Afghanistan. I think you'll find most Liberals are FINE with that. In fact, I wish Bush had gotten off of his ass, and sent those troops to Afghanistan 1 week after 9/11 instead of months after. Maybe we could have taken out the top heads of al Qaeda then.

If you have ever read any of our statements, we are clearly against the pseudo-war against terror. We have never been against the real one.

As far as your other Nostradamus-like, wishful-thinking predictions... well, that remains to be seen.

In fact, I'd say you're being a bit naive to make predictions like that before the man even takes office.

Originally posted by jibeho

Jan. 11 (Bloomberg) -- President-elect Barack Obama said reviving the U.S. economy will require scaling back on his campaign promises and personal sacrifice from all Americans.

www.bloomberg.com...

So, let me understand Obama on this topic. It was the lagging economy and the promises to improve it that got him elected and now the same economy that he promised to change will now limit his promises and result in all of us making sacrifices. No [SNIP].

For all of you hoping for Obama's Universal Healthcare Plan, don't hold your breath. The nation can't afford it. The stimulus plan will suck us dry of all of our imaginary money. I believe Obama will aim for that one in his second term.

Good Luck everybody!! Batten down the hatches we are in for a bumpy ride.

Mod Edit: Profanity/Circumvention Of Censors – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 12-1-2009 by sanctum]

Oh, no! OBAMA LIED TO US! The shame, the horror... the utter predictability.

We TOLD you so.

[edit on 13-1-2009 by Murky]

Originally posted by truthquest
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

 

Here is a link to where Obama wanted out by the end of 2008:
www.monstersandcritics.com...

I remember watching Obama on TV and he made it sound like he would be out in six months! Later I think I went back and realized he meant start withdrawing after six months. I found that to be disappointing but he did say he would be out within a year, which I found to be just not trustworthy at all.

It seems he has since changed his story to withdraw way out into 2010. 2010! Even Bush could have done that given a third term give me a break, that is pathetic!

But even that is a lie. According to the infamous RAND corporation, which would no doubt know Obama's Iraq plans very well, stated his plan is to have up to 90,000 troops in Iraq after 16 months!
See: www.rand.org...

He won't even pull out when he said he would.

(I couldn't resist that one - headline: Obama Guilty Of Third Big Lie!)

And regarding the constitution mentions, I see from your links that he in fact actually has mentions the constitution. With exception to the abortion issue however he simply mentions it in passing, not as a core issue.

And furthermore as the primary specific concerns as mostly brought up by conservatives don't seem to be mentioned. For example, I didn't see any place where he said that wars must be declared by congress before fought.

Also, one of the links you point out have him saying the constitution 'ties their hands', which although true seems like at best a neutral mention of it. I still think if you analyzed the debate transcripts from CNN and MSNBC you would find Obama mentions of the constitution as an issue in itself only after Ron Paul has mentioned it, and then later in the debates I'm betting that the mentions as an issue simply stop entirely. This is just something I noticed while watching the debates but you would really have to analyze the text carefully to know for sure.

If I had the time I would go through the transcripts for mentions of "constitution" but simply don't want to spend that time right now. Without going through them I know that Obama voted for the patriot act, meaning he doesn't care about the constitution. That is such a huge negative nothing Obama does short of changing his mind about it dramatically will ever change my opinion that he is constitutionally corrupt.

Just constitutionally corrupt? The SOB came to us by way of the Daley machine, for G-d's sake!

Crook, crook, crook, crook
Crook, crook, crook, crook
Wonderful crook, marvelous crook....
Wonderful crook, marvelous crooookkkk....
(sung to the tune of Monty Python's "Spam")

Hey, Obaaammaa people... your man LIED to us!

I am going to say this every day for the next four years. Get used to it.



[edit on 13-1-2009 by Murky]

reply to post by Murky


Speak for yourself, thanks.

He lied to you because you have trouble understanding English. Not my problem.

WASHINGTON – A week shy of taking office, President-elect Barack Obama already is putting his persuasion skills to a high-stakes test with Congress as he seeks to put his emerging administration in control of more than $1 trillion in economic stimulus and financial bailout money.

"It is clear that the financial system, although improved from where it was in September, is still fragile," Obama said Monday in making the case for the additional bailout funds. In London, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said Obama's stimulus package could provide a "significant boost" to the sinking economy. But he warned in a speech prepared for the London School of Economics that such a recovery won't last unless other steps are taken to stabilize the shaky financial system. Although Bernanke has previously endorsed the notion for a fresh round of government stimulus to lift the country out of a recession, it marked the first time the Fed chief has referenced the roughly $800 billion recovery plan now being worked on by Obama. In Congress, key tax provisions in the stimulus package remained in flux, with Obama's call for a break for companies that create new jobs described by Democratic officials as all but dead. Several Democrats prefer to use the funds to make sure upper middle class families are not ensnared by the alternative minimum tax.

Obama seeks access to half of bailout funds

So i see two scenarios here, either Obama and his goons mishandle the money just like Bush and friends and completely collapse the economic system which will then force everyone to accept the Amero OR he uses this to give the people false hope. He actually helps the people and everyone becomes grateful to him, praises him and lets their guards down. Once that happens, the real Obama will show up. He hasn't even taken office yet and he's already showing signs of being just like bush.

reply to post by lmbsc


Clinton maybe... Bush? Not even close. Well, the day we get attacked again and counters by declaring war against a different country, then starts spying on people, gives the order to torture and detain indefinitely, etc... then you can say he's like Bush.

reply to post by Irish M1ck


My comparing Obama to Bush is in regards to Bush making all kinds of promises before being elected in 2000 then used 9/11 as an excuse for not living up to his promises. Obama is not even in office yet and he's already saying that he won't be able to uphold some of his promises.

Bush's 2000 acceptance speech was widely seen as having successfully introduced the nation to a leader with strong principles, clear policies and a determination to return dignity to the Oval Office after President Bill Clinton's scandals. The speech's main refrain -- "They had their chance. They have not led. We will." -- neatly encapsulated Bush's message to the largest audience the relatively little-known Texas governor had ever faced. But the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001, made the Bush presidency largely unrecognizable from the one he outlined in Philadelphia. He did not even mention terrorism in that speech, and the speech reflected the country's inward-looking priorities. After promising a "humble" foreign policy on the stump, his main non-domestic proposal that night was for a missile defense system first debated two decades earlier.

source

Seems like Bush was promising a change from the former administration and then didn't change. Now you have another President Elect promising "change" but will it really be? Doesn't seem so in my eyes.
As far as Obama not attacking another country and torture and all that good stuff, just give him time. I truly hope that he IS different than Bush (in a good way) but will not be surprised if he turns out to be more of the same.

Hey OP, you must have not been paying attention for the past 8 years. WE HAVE BEEN HAVING A BUMPY RIDE. Hell if people arent "buckled up" by now the idiots never will.

reply to post by Irish M1ck



Support Obama all you want - everyone knows the only reason he won is he is not Bush. He is "change". He has no plan, just lots of "hope". This guy is a joke - not even in office and making excuses. If he would have listened to Ron Paul he would have seen all this coming before the election.

Hope and change. Two abstract terms he will never have to answer for - but it really doesn't matter because his shortcomings will all somehow be blamed on Bush or the Israelis or whomever the libs and media hate that week-

reply to post by lmbsc


There are so many things he's already committed to changing. You pick out a few that may need to hold off for a while and act like he's reneged on everything. You're the one being misleading.

He's already committed to trying to get every illegal thing Bush did undone, he's going to close down Guantanamo, he's going to get the troops out of Iraq ASAP, he's committed to fixing the economy, and he plans to review the Bush administration's actions for any possible illegal activity.

So far, that's what I voted for. I don't know how people who didn't vote for Obama to begin with can tell me the reasons why I voted for him (and everyone else who did also).

It's unbelievably egotistical.