Obama is NOT Change, here's proof

Collection of pre-election promises made on TV by Obama along with clips of after the election and what he is actually doing. People have such a short term memory that all they remember is that Obama is hope and change and not a single thing about what that hope and change was supposed to be.


To be honest I had forgotten his promise to reduce spending in Iraq by 9 billion a month...It's gone way up now since they are hiring more private military contractors to take over from the troops.

I think most of us initially had hope that he would do great things but we are now seeing that we were duped. Plain and simple. We got suckered real good.

Is this a way to attack healthcare, via Obama in a passive aggressive fashion?

Just wondering

Whatever happened to withdrawing from or renegotiating NAFTA?

Originally posted by stevegmu
Whatever happened to withdrawing from or renegotiating NAFTA?

I agree, what did happen to that - I wonder who be against such a move...

Not that it will happen

Here we go-

In an interview with Fortune to be featured in the magazine's upcoming issue, the presumptive Democratic nominee backed off his harshest attacks on the free trade agreement and indicated he didn't want to unilaterally reopen negotiations on NAFTA.

"Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified," he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA "devastating" and "a big mistake," despite nonpartisan studies concluding that the trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on the U.S. economy.

Does that mean his rhetoric was overheated and amplified? "Politicians are always guilty of that, and I don't exempt myself," he answered.

Obama says he believes in "opening up a dialogue" with trading partners Canada and Mexico "and figuring to how we can make this work for all people."

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said that Obama-as the candidate noted in Fortune's interview-has not changed his core position on NAFTA, and that he has always said he would talk to the leaders of Canada and Mexico in an effort to include enforceable labor and environmental standards in the pact.

Nevertheless, Obama's tone stands in marked contrast to his primary campaign's anti-NAFTA fusillades. The pact creating a North American free-trade zone was President Bill Clinton's signature accomplishment; but NAFTA is also the bugaboo of union leaders, grassroots activists and Midwesterners who blame free trade for the factory closings they see in their hometowns.

The Democratic candidates fought hard to win over those factions of their party, with Obama generally following Hillary Clinton's lead in setting a protectionist tone.

In February, as the campaign moved into the Rust Belt, both candidates vowed to invoke a six-month opt-out clause ("as a hammer," in Obama's words) to pressure Canada and Mexico to make concessions.

link


So he admitted he lied...

Originally posted by stevegmu
Here we go-

In an interview with Fortune to be featured in the magazine's upcoming issue, the presumptive Democratic nominee backed off his harshest attacks on the free trade agreement and indicated he didn't want to unilaterally reopen negotiations on NAFTA.

"Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified," he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA "devastating" and "a big mistake," despite nonpartisan studies concluding that the trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on the U.S. economy.

Does that mean his rhetoric was overheated and amplified? "Politicians are always guilty of that, and I don't exempt myself," he answered.

Obama says he believes in "opening up a dialogue" with trading partners Canada and Mexico "and figuring to how we can make this work for all people."

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said that Obama-as the candidate noted in Fortune's interview-has not changed his core position on NAFTA, and that he has always said he would talk to the leaders of Canada and Mexico in an effort to include enforceable labor and environmental standards in the pact.

Nevertheless, Obama's tone stands in marked contrast to his primary campaign's anti-NAFTA fusillades. The pact creating a North American free-trade zone was President Bill Clinton's signature accomplishment; but NAFTA is also the bugaboo of union leaders, grassroots activists and Midwesterners who blame free trade for the factory closings they see in their hometowns.

The Democratic candidates fought hard to win over those factions of their party, with Obama generally following Hillary Clinton's lead in setting a protectionist tone.

In February, as the campaign moved into the Rust Belt, both candidates vowed to invoke a six-month opt-out clause ("as a hammer," in Obama's words) to pressure Canada and Mexico to make concessions.

link


So he admitted he lied...

Over react much STEVE? I was agreeing with you 100%

The guy is not keeping to his campaign talk - have a beer dude

reply to post by warrenb

I think most of us initially had hope that he would do great things but we are now seeing that we were duped. Plain and simple. We got suckered real good.

He still has 3.25 years left. Don't you think there may be plenty of time left for him to fulfill those promises?

Originally posted by jam321
reply to post by warrenb

 

I think most of us initially had hope that he would do great things but we are now seeing that we were duped. Plain and simple. We got suckered real good.

He still has 3.25 years left. Don't you think there may be plenty of time left for him to fulfill those promises?

Jam
There is some time - but I don't see him keeping to much of it... He has gone in the toilet one this healthcare awesomeness, I don't think he will accomplish half of his promises and/or he was pandering during the campaign.

OP
Regardless the "fight" now is healthcare, I think this thread directs distrust at Obama
in order to demonize anything to do with Healthcare - it fits the pattern.

You guys need a new dance

Lmao off at the end!

Was that really necessary though?

reply to post by mental modulator


I was just backing up my point.

Originally posted by mental modulator
Regardless the "fight" now is healthcare, I think this thread directs distrust at Obama
in order to demonize anything to do with Healthcare - it fits the pattern.

You guys need a new dance

Well... you brought up health care, not I.
Your trying to steer the conversation away from the OP which is that, in a nutshell you'll get lots of change but not the change you wanted or that he promised.


wake up bucko

[edit on 9-9-2009 by warrenb]

reply to post by warrenb


Warren I am well aware of the system and how it works...
I also understand that most things are manipulated, planned by unforeseen hands.

But at the same time I hear people say that Healthcare Reform is a move towards Socialism and an Obama dictatorship via Obama's radical thoughts and associations. At the same time the NWO is attempting to assimilate America into the world government.

My problem is that these two ends are not very campatable with each other,

Obama is a EGOMANIACAL socialist (which entails a strong federal government and assimilation of all business into the realm of government control) hell bent on turning the US into the soviet union.

But then the same people insist that Obama is a puppet for a very CAPITAL driven
NWO...

The more you expand the ideas in concert the more they do not seem compatible...

Anyways, I believe mandating that insurance companies cannot drop sick patients,
place caps on coverage and other thing are better than the current system for the PUBLIC. I will take a little bit of good in a seemingly bad world -

Your belief that every single political event is 100% manipulated is not 100% true.







[edit on 9-9-2009 by mental modulator]

I don't think we can believe anything that any political candidate says when they are running for office. Some campaign manager studies demographics, polls, trends, public opinion, etc., and then the candidate is given direction on what to say to come off as more appealing to those voters who might be leaning in another direction. They're giving a sales pitch to potential voters, nothing more. And then, once the votes are counted and they are swelling with pride as a result of victory, all of that "rhetoric" is quickly forgotten.

reply to post by mental modulator


But isn't that assuming that Obama understands and is going along with the NWO agenda?
Does a puppet see his strings? He could have been picked as someone that could push the correct agenda till his time was up and his purpose surved...

Bush wasn't in on 9/11 but reacted to the event as desired...