It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Will Obama 'Change' The Bush Police State, Or Expand It?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 10:49 AM

Will Obama 'Change' The Bush Police State, Or Expand It?

- Will Obama end the warrantless secret surveillance and phone-taps of American citizens?

- Will Obama follow through on his rhetorical support for the second amendment or will he seek to ban guns as he did in Illinois?

- Will Obama cease his support for the Bush-administration backed banker bailouts, hated by the majority of Americans, and target the real cause of the problem - the Federal Reserve - or will he continue to give taxpayers’ money to banks who are merely hoarding it all for themselves?

- Will Obama seek to continue the militarization of America and preparations for martial law through Northcom and the secret government or will he dismantle the police state that has been constructed over the last eight years by the Bush administration?

(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 10:49 AM
These are questions, that everyone should be asking, and be concerned about.

Sadly, I think that once again, everyone has had their attention drawn elsewhere.

I can only hope that people remain awoken as they have had no choice to do with this last ever-criminalistic regime, and do not get lulled right back into a state of sleep-walking pacifistic ceding of what little rights they have left...

Keep your eyes and ears open people, we still have MUCH work left ahead of us...
(visit the link for the full news article)

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:22 AM
Obama's stance on the bailouts...he backed them however supposedly did so with reservations and cited four conditions. He voted for the bailout anyway in spite of his criteria:Obama on bailouts

From above source:

Adding some specificity to proposals he has already made, Mr. Obama, the Democratic presidential nominee, called for a payback plan for taxpayers if the bailout succeeds; a bipartisan board to oversee the bailout; limits on any federal money going to compensate Wall Street executives; and aid to homeowners who are struggling to pay their mortgages.

So far none of his "conditions" have been met...yet.

Obama on warrentless wire taps

For one thing, under an Obama presidency, Americans will be able to leave behind the era of George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and "wiretaps without warrants," he said. (He was referring to the lingering legal fallout over reports that the National Security Agency scooped up Americans' phone and Internet activities without court orders, ostensibly to monitor terrorist plots, in the years after the September 11 attacks.)


In our own Technology Voters' Guide, when asked whether he supports shielding telecommunications and Internet companies from lawsuits accusing them of illegal spying, Obama gave us a one-word response: "No."

On Gun Control: he's not a fan of guns clearly. This source offers a quick breakdown with links to the actual articles the excerpts are taken from. So it would appear from first glance that he is in favor of banning "certain" types of guns however prefers it be done at a local level.

Militarization of the US:

Well it doesn't look as though much will change in that respect. He feels that the National Guard needs backup. Whether that leads to an open ended Military presence in the US or not, that will have to be waited out. But here is a great article Q & A style on his views of Military abroad and at home.

Defense News

His answers were very open ended naturally. I don't think it's too early to determine that a stronger Military presence on US soil should be expected.

What I want is a fully integrated armed forces that can deal with the full spectrum of threats that are out there. I want them to be able to engage in counterinsurgency and asymmetrical presences that are out there. I also want them to be able to respond if near peers are able to mount attacks in situations that are more conventional. Our naval and air superiority has to be maintained.

and this blurb - seems vague but it's telling.

I mean, we still have a national security apparatus on the civilian side in the way the State Department is structured and [Agency for International Development] and all these various agencies. That hearkens back to the Cold War. And we need that wing of our national security apparatus to carry its weight. When we talk about reinventing our military, we should reinvent that apparatus as well. We need to be able to deploy teams that combine agricultural specialists and engineers and linguists and cultural specialists who are prepared to go into some of the most dangerous areas alongside our military.

There will be no President without flaw or fault but given the two candidates running I think the better choice won out.

As a Canadian, I think Obama will perhaps bring our PM in Hiding out of his little shell...I think he'll open doors of communication (which are vital) with many nations that refused to listen to the US before.

I do also believe that it will get worse before it get's better. Hopefully it means better relations and more dialogue between nations.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:28 AM
Of course he'll expand it.

All of Bushs nonsense will just get re-labeled. Instead of saving us from terrorists we'll be tracked, spied on and cataloged for reasons of healthcare and welfare.

Now he has all the support he needs to disarm us to boot and the Brady people are all a flutter about it.

The Constitution will continue to get shredded. Privacy will continue to degrade. Private property will continue to be confiscated. And all we'll be left with should the time come to do anything about it will be muskets. Way to go Obama. Evil SOB if there ever was one.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:29 AM
Whatever he said while on the campaign will not come true. When he is president on Jan 20, we will judge him on his words. For example he says that he will pull troops out immediately when elected. Now his policy is based on the conditions going on in Iraq. The reality will just crash into his face.

Bush was against nation building prior to the election of 2000, now presently we are nation-builders after he became president. Don't hope for Obama.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:34 AM
Guns- I think they will not mess with guns the first two years. They don't want to rock the boat, anger voters, and put Republicans back in charge of Congress in 2010.

Phone taps- Big brother will continue to spy on everyone. Obama can't stop this. Plus voting for FISA showed that other issues could convince him as to the need for spying on people.

Taxpayer money- the family tradition will continue and the federal reserve will continue as is. Too much power involved. I don't think any President could stop the federal reserve.

Homeland Patrol- He will keep it as Bush and will say he will keep an eye on them for any signs of abuses.
Terrorism will continue to be the reason we have to give big brother more power.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:26 PM
Personally, I think that anyone as president is better than that Idiot G.W. Bush .....a 5th grader would have done a better job as president and I lost respect for all people who voted for Bush the last 2 times, many of my friends included.

Of course not that it matters, because there's a history of puppetry at play here. Obama is just a face with Illuminati controlling his every move.

So whether him or skeletor won, it doesnt matter because of whos running the show

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:40 PM
As it stands at the moment, anyone is better than Bush.

We will have to wait and see what Obama does now. Nobody can know until he starts making the decisions.

But I must say, these were SUPPOSED to be the important questions on everyone's minds DURING the election campaigns.

Why are these questions being asked now?!

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:45 PM
More of the same, if you ask me...

I know I'm not an US citizen, maybe my opinion doesn't mean much on this thread, but that's my opinion.

For me, only the skin color is different, and honestly, that doesn't mean anything at all.


posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:50 PM
reply to post by johnsky

Well, I think many of us here WERE asking those questions, unfortunately the Lame-stream media wasn't nor were the vast majorities of americans.

What has had me uneasy from the getgo is that many of the policies that the criminals in the Decider's cabal have pushed, this incoming POTUS was first in line, right there voting alongside of them FOR...

Warrantless wiretapping / spying---CHECK.

Wall Street Fraud Profiteer Bailout's at the tax-payers expense---CHECK.

And what worries me more, is that while simultaniously talking about getting troops out of the Iraq debacle, he has not been shy about EXPANDING these invasional foreign policy plunder-blunders into Pakistan, and flooding Afghanistan with more troops. And with recent events, I would not be surprised to see Syria and Iran on the list as well.

So as much as I'd like to stay optimistic, from what I see and hear, it sounds like a case of, "The more things change, the more they stay the same..."

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 01:53 PM
The possibilities.
As long as Obama saves money dropping the security jobs we
didn't need and not reduce benefits like Clinton did, we can
count our change and kiss the man on the lips.
If that is you preference ladies but not the gents.

Yeah, the police state is gone.
Find useful jobs with the Illuminati.
Where is that application blank.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:09 PM
Good topic.Star and flag for you.I would like to see somebody come and try to take my guns, This is the same crap as before when the FBI raided Mountain Home..That family was doing nothing wrong but because they had a large number of weapons they were designated as potential threats, I served my country and my job still serves the country and I do nothing wrong so If I want to stockpile weapons so be it, If this is any inclination to what is to come I say try me and the thousands upon thousands who own weapons and are tax paying law abiding citizens...

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:14 PM
Only Kucinich and Paul were proposing to abolish the executive powers that were enacted during the Bush administration..... I would assume that anyone sitting in the oval office would be a possible threat to abuse the unconstitutional power that the present administration has given itself.... Whatever TPTB wants is what we will get, but there is a very remote possibility that it may not be that way. I wouldn't see why we should expect any real change with out some sort of act of divine intervention that wipes out the plans that are in place.

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:22 PM
Its kinda funny and to be honest I have no issues with this new president elect howver I do have issues with constitutional rights and there are other issues as well where I would like to voice especially since I was channel surfing and came across a statement that our new president elect wants to cut the budget for the private sector what exactly does he mean private sector?, Since I have many close friends that work in the private sector especially Blackwater this could affect those employers but I will be glad if Halliburton/KBR get the boot because those people are the anti christ and are doing more harm than good overseas. I just cannot sit around while somebody may try to alter our constitution, This new president needs to address the border issues especially with an aunt who is an undocumented citizen and fix our economy and stop screwing over the lower class and the middle class and as I said before nobody will take away the right to bear arms and if I want to go out and buy another rifle tonight I just might, I pay taxes and I dont break the law and I for one will not stand by and let this happen..............

posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 11:41 PM
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

The possibility of Obama considering appointment of another banker elite to the secretary of Treasury-----Check

Meet Tim Geithner. Nothing like having a Federal Reserve guy in the treasury huh? I wonder if this is the change we can believe in?

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 08:03 AM
He'll definitely expand it. He is against the Iraqi war, but strongly believes that terrorist brought down the twin towers and strongly supports the afghan war and war on terror. Part of war on terror is fought at home and he'll continue this as well.

America always needs an external enemy. It was Soviet Union, but when it collapsed U.S. didn't work well. For military companies it's very useful to have an enemy, because workers know they are building machines to beat someone else and they work good. If there is no enemy they get lazy and mistakes happen. Enemy is also useful to control the public and if there is a chance to control them, why not? Obama won't change that. He is now part of the political elite too. You can't be successful politician if you aren't. You don't get private money for campaign and so on...

So you'll be controlled for quite some time...

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 08:20 AM
Obamassiah will expand executive powers to a level never thought possible. This "guy" believes the consitution is a henderance to his agenda. The consitution limits the power of government. In the name of "helping" the masses he will subvert it.........

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 08:24 AM
People have too many high hopes on Obama, he is just a man, somebody that has been given the presidency but the powers behind his status are still the ones that dictate the nations fate.

Sorry to tell you this but the power behind our President already put the laws in place for the Police state we have right now and no new president or future president is going to do darn thing to change.

The bush administration put the gears in place for a total control of government by those running the nation behind the President.

So do not expect anything my friends.

Only we the people can change the fate of our nation.

[edit on 7-11-2008 by marg6043]

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 11:56 AM
You and I are both former Marines with the same opinion as to the way things work and what is going on..... I catch myself taking sides at times, when I am confronted by an misinformed person that will get all crazy and emotional, and spout out nonsensical accusations about candidates or issues. I try to hold my tongue, because as much time as I spend trying to be informed, I know that I am not immune to the clever and effective manipulations.... When we vote we are voting for an image of what we are told we want, we get in return the image that we are getting what we voted for,and if not it is not who we voted for but the opposition, that is responsible for our sides failure. TPTB have been in place for a very long time, and it never ceases to amaze me at all that they are as good as they are, at what they do.... I sometimes feel that I am helplessly alone and living amongst zombies. Thank you. .......Semper Fi.

posted on Nov, 7 2008 @ 04:01 PM
this is the 64 dollar question I'm asking myself ,I didn't hear him say he was going to to I know Bidden has indicated he wanted to role back the powers umm ....

He really can't ever be the guy who gutted the constitution,since that's already been done

All we can do is wait and see what he does with the economy,that will tell us what he intends elsewhere

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in