I guess you see them as threats since you're a hard core conservative. . Jk.

But seriously, I think if Obama does much of what he said he would do over the campaign I think he would make a lot of people happier and then everyone would be left with the feeling that anyone can be President.

But anyways, *puts on tinfoil hat*

To me, it all depends if this is a conspiracy, or, if it's just politics. If Obama is part of a conspiracy to destroy the country-- this is what he would do-- he would say one thing and do another. If it isn't a conspiracy and Obama really meant what he said-- after all-- keep in mind he was the most liberal Senator-- then he might actually be more liberal than he made himself out to be when he was campaigning. He would also follow through on more of his promises than we expect him to due to his ideological stance. It all depends on if it's a conspiracy or not IMO.

I read in an article in the Economist magazine today about how if Obama governed from the center he might not be able to govern because he needs the left. So, it said that he would have to govern from the left in order to keep his supporters happy. I am part of the left myself, I am part of the anti-war, environmental friendly, and part of the social justice group of liberals, and, I expect for him to govern as a liberal and that's all what I want of him. If he doesn't-- you can count on me to be his fiercist. critic.

But does it matter what he promised? Him being the most liberal Senator should tell what his Presidency will be like. I think his first few days of office is an indication of how liberal the Presidency will be like.

[edit on 26-1-2009 by Frankidealist35]

[edit on 26-1-2009 by Frankidealist35]

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
I guess you see them as threats since you're a hard core conservative. . Jk.

I guess you shouldn't be guessing ... since I'm not.

What's Jk.???

I think this is a probably a good site to track the 509 campaign promises (and threats) he made during the election cycle. I said a good site for people no matter what their views on Obama's promises.

It's also a surprise to see that he made 509 of them.

It takes a lot of campaign rhetoric and promises to get elected.

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
Sounds like you didn't give him a chance at all...

No, I did. That's what the election cycle is all about. You listen to what they say they are going to do (or listen to their rhetoric and realize it's just rhetoric) and you decide if you want that person or not. It was very easy to decide I didn't want him. In many areas, what he wants to do go completely against what I think is best for this country.

He had his chance with me. I gave it to him. He failed. But I'm sure he doesn't care since his campaign rhetoric tickled the fancy of more people then not .. and he got elected.

I gave Bush more of a chance than you gave Obama a chance.

So?

I guess you only support Presidents when they have an R next to their name or when they don't have a D next to their name.

I told you to stop guessing. You keep getting it wrong.
I've voted for republicans, democrats and, in this last election, CONSTITUTION PARTY. Gee .. R's, D's and C's after the names.

I guess that Obama is just too liberal for you.

Too liberal? Here's a partial list of he's 'too' for me.

- He's TOO much of a bildeberger tool.
- He TOO inexperienced.
- He's TOO in favor of slaughtering the preborn.
- He spent TOO many years hanging with racists at Rev. Wrights 'church'.
- He's TOO in favor of NASA cuts.
- He's TOO in favor of tax and spend.
- He's TOO in favor of turning America into a nanny-state
- He's TOO much like every other pollitician so his rhetoric of 'change' is silly.
- He's TOO thick to realize that you can't talk to terrorists and expect rational responses.

I'm not a blind follower of Obama.

At this point I wouldn't slap the label of Obamatron on you.
Your behavior and attitude haven't earned you that title.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
Sounds like you didn't give him a chance at all...

No, I did. That's what the election cycle is all about. You listen to what they say they are going to do (or listen to their rhetoric and realize it's just rhetoric) and you decide if you want that person or not. It was very easy to decide I didn't want him. In many areas, what he wants to do go completely against what I think is best for this country.

Yes, it's easy to dismiss someone as all talk. I've been following Obama for a bit and so far he seems to be doing well. I'm part of the left, and, I guess that you're a conservative, so that's why you disagree with his policies. But I like what he's done so far. He's going to allow for the nation to be the best in science again by allowing stem cell research and he's allowing the women's right to choose by allowing abortion again. I think he needs to make far more social changes in the country. I could write a book on all the social problems of the last 8 years if I wanted to. Obama has a lot on his plate. I expect that anyone who was running during the 08 election knows the perils of the economic situation and understands global problems. I expect Obama to at least have some plan. Not saying he'll be perfect. Just saying.

He had his chance with me. I gave it to him. He failed. But I'm sure he doesn't care since his campaign rhetoric tickled the fancy of more people then not .. and he got elected.

Really? I've seen nothing but anti-Obama and anti-Democrat posts from you.

So?

It makes you Republicans seem like hypocrites for saying it's okay to not support the President because we didn't support him when in reality you've been against him from the start and we supported Bush for at least 2 or so years.

I guess you only support Presidents when they have an R next to their name or when they don't have a D next to their name.

I told you to stop guessing. You keep getting it wrong.
I've voted for republicans, democrats and, in this last election, CONSTITUTION PARTY. Gee .. R's, D's and C's after the names.
I just did a google search on the constitution party and it said that the constitution party was conservative. So I was right in assuming you were conservative... unless you didn't do any research in who you were voting for.

I guess that Obama is just too liberal for you.

Too liberal? Here's a partial list of he's 'too' for me.

- He's TOO much of a bildeberger tool.
- He TOO inexperienced.
- He's TOO in favor of slaughtering the preborn.
- He spent TOO many years hanging with racists at Rev. Wrights 'church'.
- He's TOO in favor of NASA cuts.
- He's TOO in favor of tax and spend.
- He's TOO in favor of turning America into a nanny-state
- He's TOO much like every other pollitician so his rhetoric of 'change' is silly.
- He's TOO thick to realize that you can't talk to terrorists and expect rational responses.
Let me respond to that.
How is he more of a bilderburg tool than the other candidates?
What does experience matter anyways? The more experienced politicians created the problems in our country today.
No humans are killed in the process of abortion.
I notice how you and the more conservative types seem to love playing the guilt by association game, so, I'll leave this be.
How is he too in favor of NASA cuts? I haven't seen proof of that.
And Republicans and current conservatives are too in favor of borrowing money from China.
Bush already turned America into a nanny state.
He is a bit different from most politicians. Most politicians are orators. Obama is more like a conversationalist.
A little talking can go a long ways. Bush didn't talk to people for the first 7 years of his administration and look what happened.

I'm not a blind follower of Obama.

At this point I wouldn't slap the label of Obamatron on you.
Your behavior and attitude haven't earned you that title.
You should know, that I didn't register Democrat this election because of Obama. I registered Democrat because of my anti-war views, my anti-death penalty views, my liberal views on social justice, my position on global warming, the environment, on education, my liberal view on science and women rights, and for my liberal view on the separation of church on state. I registered Democrat based on ideological reasons and I would have even if Obama wasn't elected as our party's nominee for Presidency.

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
I like what he's done so far.

I DO NOT like what he's done so far.
And I definately DO NOT like what he says he's going to do.

I've seen nothing but anti-Obama and anti-Democrat posts from you.

Guess you missed all the anti-bush and anti-mccain and anti-palin posts.
You are only seeing what you want to see.

It makes you Republicans

You assume I'm republican. that's a mistake.

So I was right in assuming you were conservative

You said that I only support those with an 'R' next to their name.
You are wrong.

How is he more of a bilderburg tool than the other candidates?

I didn't say he was MORE of one. Just that he IS one.
Again - you are seeing what you want to see.

What does experience matter anyways?

You are kidding, right?

No humans are killed in the process of abortion.

Wrong.

How is he too in favor of NASA cuts?

He wants to cut NASA programs 'just for five years', in order to pay for education programs. that's what he said on the campaign trail. And I strongly disagree with this. Also - there is no way to cut 'just for five years'. If you start cutting programs that have international business consequences it will be very hard to draw those business partners back.

Republicans and current conservatives are too in favor of borrowing money from China.

I agree. So what has that to do with Obama?

Bush already turned America into a nanny state.

He started the process. Got the way paved for Obama.
Both are bildeberger tools. They are working in tandem.

Let's get back on topic, shall we?

THE TOPIC IS OBAMA'S 509 CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
I like what he's done so far.

I DO NOT like what he's done so far.
And I definately DO NOT like what he says he's going to do.

Well, I DO like what he's done so far. I guess you can't please everyone.

I've seen nothing but anti-Obama and anti-Democrat posts from you.

Guess you missed all the anti-bush and anti-mccain and anti-palin posts.
You are only seeing what you want to see.
I haven't seen them... but I've seen other posts by you where you make wild accusations about liberalism.

You assume I'm republican. that's a mistake.

Conservative. Okay.

So I was right in assuming you were conservative

You said that I only support those with an 'R' next to their name.
You are wrong.
Okay, then, let me say it differently. You seem like the type that doesn't support liberal candidates.

How is he more of a bilderburg tool than the other candidates?

I didn't say he was MORE of one. Just that he IS one.
Again - you are seeing what you want to see.
It's the way you said it. You said he was too much of a bilderburg connection when you didn't talk about any other of the candidates possible bilderburg connections-- it's like you just focused and acted like (to me) he was the only one that had them.

What does experience matter anyways?

You are kidding, right?
Did you see what I said about experienced politicians being the ones that cause problems? We need more fresh people into the system.

No humans are killed in the process of abortion.

Wrong.
I disagree. I'm pro-choice and I see you're pro-life so we'll leave it at that.

How is he too in favor of NASA cuts?

He wants to cut NASA programs 'just for five years', in order to pay for education programs. that's what he said on the campaign trail. And I strongly disagree with this. Also - there is no way to cut 'just for five years'. If you start cutting programs that have international business consequences it will be very hard to draw those business partners back.
I doubt he'll actually do that when he's President. He would upset too many people.

Republicans and current conservatives are too in favor of borrowing money from China.

I agree. So what has that to do with Obama?

Taxing and spending is better than borrowing money from China. And I thought this whole idea that Obama's tax plan would increase taxes was already debunked.

Bush already turned America into a nanny state.

He started the process. Got the way paved for Obama.
I haven't seen evidence of that yet. However, I see Obama as potentially doing harm in other ways...

Both are bildeberger tools. They are working in tandem.

Okay...

THE TOPIC IS OBAMA'S 509 CAMPAIGN PROMISES

Okay... I think it's too early to tell what Obama will do. Just my $.02.

SOME of the 509 promises that people may have forgotten about -

No. 123: Fully fund debt cancellation for heavily indebted poor countries "Barack Obama and Joe Biden want to see 100 percent debt cancellation for the world's heavily-indebted poor countries. They are committed to living up to the promise to fully fund debt cancellation for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC)."

No. 124: Create a fund for international small and medium enterprises (SME) "Building on the growing evidence that micro finance works, an Obama administration will provide initial capital for an SME Fund. Administered through the Overseas Private Investment Corporation, an independent U.S. government agency, the government will provide seed capital matched by a larger portion from the private sector.

No. 130: Provide at least $2 billion for services to Iraqi refugees
"Provide at least $2 billion to expand services to Iraqi refugees in neighboring countries."

No. 133: Provide $30 billion over 10 years to Israel
"Implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade -- investments to Israel's security that will not be tied to any other nation."

But seriously, I think if Obama does much of what he said he would do over the campaign I think he would make a lot of people happier and then everyone would be left with the feeling that anyone can be President.

Doing them will not make people happy. Their happiness will depend on the result. If the results turn out disastrous, would you be happy just because he kept his promise.

No. 133: Provide $30 billion over 10 years to Israel
"Implement a Memorandum of Understanding that provides $30 billion in assistance to Israel over the next decade -- investments to Israel's security that will not be tied to any other nation."

This one gets me. WHY are we providing $30 Billion of our tax money in 'assistance' to Israel when Israel can darn well pay for it's own way in the world. I understand the arguement that they are 'allies' and we need to keep them up and running .. but I think they are capable of keeping themselves up and running without our $30 billion in 'assistance'.

And this one - world wide wealth redistribution - with my tax money.

No. 123: Fully fund debt cancellation for heavily indebted poor countries "Barack Obama and Joe Biden want to see 100 percent debt cancellation for the world's heavily-indebted poor countries. They are committed to living up to the promise to fully fund debt cancellation for Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC)."

BIG PROMISE BROKEN - #234

To reduce bills rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them, Obama "will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days."

So much for transparancy. NO CHANGE.

And from 'Still no sunlight before signing' ...

When President Obama signed his first bill without posting it to the Web for five days of public comment, we gave him his first Promise Broken.

For his second bill, Obama signed an expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program, which provides health coverage for low-income children. He signed it on Feb. 4, 2009, just hours after it was finalized in Congress.

This time, though, the White House had posted the text of the working bill to its Web site on Feb. 1, 2009, with the following note : "Since this version of the bill is expected to pass the House of Representatives in the coming week, we are making the legislation available for public comment now."

That doesn't quite cut it for his promise, though. The legislation was still in process in Congress, and even if no substantial changes were made, the possibility was still there. It's not the five-day waiting period he had promised.