'Change' = Lobbyists and Clintonistas

Everywhere you look in the new administration - lobbyists and Clintonistas. So where is the ‘change’ from how things have been done and gotten us in trouble all this time? If the Clintons were part of the problem, as you have said in the past, then why are you hiring all the Clintonists, Mr. Obama? If the lobbyists are part of the problem, why are you hiring all the lobbyists, Mr. Obama?

How can there be 'change' in the way things are done when practically everyone who is hired is a Clintonista or a lobbyist or someone with ties to the massively corrupt Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac??

Sen. Biden biography
Old time Washington. Part of the problem for the past 30 years.

Chief of Staff Emanuel
Clintonista

BBC News

All in all, 31 of the 47 transition or staff posts that Mr Obama has filled so far have gone to people with ties to the Clinton administration, Politico has reported. Eleven of the 12 members of his Transition Advisory Board are Clinton veterans. And, according to officials quoted by a number of US media outlets, Mr Obama is even considering picking the biggest Clinton insider of them all - Hillary Clinton - as his Secretary of State.

Boston Globe

President-elect Barack Obama, who vowed during his campaign that lobbyists "won't find a job in my White House," said through a spokesman yesterday that he would allow lobbyists on his transition team as long as they work on issues unrelated to their earlier jobs

New York Times
Hired Gregory B. Craig – Clintonista
Hired Ronald B. Klain – Clintonista and Lobbyiest. Ties to Fannie Mae.

USA Today
Obama’s ties to lobbyists

The Hill
Lobbyists on Obama’s payroll

ABC News

One of Obama's top transition team members, Thomas Donilon, oversaw an aggressive, backdoor lobbying campaign by mortgage giant Fannie Mae to undermine the credibility of a probe into the firm's accounting irregularities, according to a 2006 government report on the company.

Fraklin Raines biography
Fannie Mae CEO Franklin Raines is now an Obama financial advisor.
More on Raines

James A. Johnson Biography
And let's not forget James A. Johnson - VP search team leader - Bildeberger with ties to Fannie Mae

NO CHANGE. NO HOPE. NO UNITY.
Just politics as usual.
(no surprise either)

Absolutely correct. And the Obama faithful response to these facts is always "Well, of course we want people who have experience in powerful positions! Would you rather have someone who was inexperienced?"

And that is always very funny - because the point is that Obama ran on change, again and again we were told that he would bring change to Washington in everything he did. Instead, he put in Democrat party hacks loyal to previous administrations - when he told us he was not going to do things according to the "old Washington" way. Instead, he is allowing all sorts of lobbyists in his administration AFTER promising that no lobbyist would work for him.

Claiming to be a agent of change and then doing exactly the opposite?

Yes, we can believe that Obama's campaign was nothing but propaganda.

Originally posted by LowLevelMason
Claiming to be a agent of change and then doing exactly the opposite?

Yep. The exact opposite. This is Jimmy Carter II using Clintonistas and lobbyists to get the job done. Nothing new here except the mouthpiece is a 1/2 black fella from Chicago with no experience. (heck - he even carries tons of baggage just like 'old politics'.)

Wasn't most his campaign staff full of old timers from previous administrations.

Just another politician and more of the same.


Change
Helped
A
No Name
Get
Elected

Come on now guys. You know we aren't supposed to start talking bad about Obama until he officially takes office.

Give him a chance to "change" us!



Seriously though, how long will the droves of supporters continue to defend moves like this? Rahm, now Hillary being appointed? Come on now, I know they will argue that you can't expect him to appoint inexperienced people to the cabinet, but to bring in a bunch of "politics as usual" old timers?

It hardly seems like the "change we need."

What more can be said.

In the words of Johnny Rotten: "This is what you want, this is what you get".

Bamboozled and hoodwinked for the next 4 years.

Well, the slogan should be changed from "Change" to "Insanity"

Einstein's definition of insanity: is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Good post way to sum up all the "changes". Starred.

Also don't forget BO is pushing another stimulus package! Yeah that's change!

reply to post by FlyersFan


I have to admit I've been a bit disappointed by some of his selections. But it is important to understand that Obama is facing one of the most difficult situations for a new president in history, and he needs people who can hit the ground running--who know how to work within the system and move things along immediately. The Clintons also have a good "brand name" in the US and around the world that I think he wants to capitalize on. Hill comes with Bill and Bill can be a great asset as the Obama Admin tries to repair the reputation of the country around the world.

So again, his choices show that he is going to be playing by the old Washington rules, but there are some good reasons for Clintonizing the White House at this point in time....


Change?....It will be a change from the Bush/Cheney Hell Ride, but anyone who expected Nirvana was dreaming awake.





[edit on 18-11-2008 by Silenceisall]

Originally posted by Silenceisall
he needs people who can hit the ground running--who know how to work within the system and move things along.

- Then if this country needs someone who can hit the ground running and who know how the system works - they shouldn't have picked such an inexperienced politician to be POTUS.

- If Obama needs to recall almost the entire Clinton administration then that's not 'change for the usual poltiics' at all - and he was liar to be using that rhetoric and making those kinds of promises.

- He promised not to use lobbyists. This was part of his 'change'. He went back on that in a big way as well.

There is no change from politics as usual.

No change. No hope. No unity.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
Then if this country needs someone who can hit the ground running and who know how the system works - they shouldn't have picked such an inexperienced politician to be POTUS.

That's exactly right. Someone made a similar comment on a different thread and I responded much the same way.

he was liar to be using that rhetoric and making those kinds of promises.

Agreed again.

He ran on a message of change, and then "changed" his tune once he got elected.

He promised not to use lobbyists. This was part of his 'change'. He went back on that in a big way as well.

Just like he went back on his promise regarding campaign finance.

Honestly, how can anyone believe anything this man promises?

reply to post by FlyersFan


Did you ever believe that he wasn't a politician, or that he did not know how to move within the system. How do you think he got all those endorsements from both sides? Why don't you kick back and enjoy the thought that your country will no longer be run by GWB and Dr. Evil. Wait to see what Obama does in terms of policy before jumping up and down screaming I told you so.


Or better yet, why don't you tell what he should do?



[edit on 18-11-2008 by Silenceisall]

reply to post by Silenceisall

But it is important to understand that Obama is facing one of the most difficult situations for a new president in history, and he needs people who can hit the ground running--who know how to work within the system and move things along immediately.

Shouldnt this be the PRESIDENT ?? Yet it didnt seem to matter that he was completely inexperienced on anything.

So, is this why he was elected...because people figured he would hire a bunch of has beens? So, everyone knew he was completely inexperienced, but he sure can SPEAK....and shoot, he will hire enough people that will do the job for him...he will just stand there, say what they want him to say and look purty.

Eh. The word CHANGE was simply a marketing ploy IMO. Looks like the SAME ol Washington. *shrug*

[edit on 11/18/2008 by greeneyedleo]

Originally posted by Silenceisall
Why don't you kick back and enjoy the thought that your country will no longer be run by GWB and Dr. Evil.

Because now we have to kick back and suffer the thought of having our country run by Obama.

Not everyone is a fan of him or his policies.

Originally posted by LowLevelMason
And the Obama faithful response to these facts is always "Well, of course we want people who have experience in powerful positions! Would you rather have someone who was inexperienced?"

And you fail to answer... What's wrong with that question?

we were told that he would bring change to Washington in everything he did.

Can you show me ONE PLACE Obama said he would bring change to Washington IN EVERYTHING HE DID? Thanks.

Look, you can take a 2009 Lamborghini Gallardo and put a little old lady behind the wheel and you're ride will be a certain experience. When you put a professional race car driver behind the wheel, it's the same car, but your experience, as the passenger in both cases, is going to be 100% DIFFERENT.

You can complain all you want that you've already ridden in that car and a change of drivers is no change at all... but you'd be REALLY WRONG.

So, let me know what's wrong with Obama picking a team of well-tuned, well-oiled experienced people as his "vehicle" and thinking that the "ride" is going to be quite a bit different (representing CHANGE) with him behind the wheel.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
No change. No hope. No unity.

Not if you have anything to say about it!

[edit on 18-11-2008 by Benevolent Heretic]

Wow you guys crack me up.

Obama cannot entirely exclude anyone who has functioned in a lobbying role in DC without eliminating 90% of qualified candidates.

Obama restrictions on Lobbyists thus far are more than any president in history.

While the Republicans ARE SUING to overturn THEIR OWN NOMINEE'S legislation to reduce lobbyists influence.

RNC Sues To Overturn McCain-Feingold
www.abovetopsecret.com...

reply to post by greeneyedleo


Yes, a President needs to be able to make good decisions, but he doesn't have 40 heads to keep track of every aspect of government. He needs capable people who can get things done within the machine of Washinton. he has that in the people he has selected so far.

And unlike Bush--another unqualified President at the start of his first term--Obama seems to have the abaility to learn on the job.

Originally posted by Silenceisall
Did you ever believe that he wasn't a politician,

I have always believed him to be a typical corrupt liar of a politician. His baggage shows this to be true. Now his 'chickens are coming home to roost' in regards to his lies about 'change from politics as usual'.

Those who believed he would actually change the way things were done in Washington were obviously bamboozled. The massive numbers of Clintonistas and lobbyists - all from the old school of politics - show what a lie the rhetoric of 'change' was.

Side note Silenceisall - I didn't vote for McCain or Obama.

Originally posted by Silenceisall
enjoy the thought that your country will no longer be run by GWB and Dr. Evil.

I would - but this country elected more of the same.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Can you show me ONE PLACE Obama said he would bring change to Washington IN EVERYTHING HE DID?

His entire theme was change from politics as usual. The whole damn thing. You just want to play word games to spin the truth of the situation.

I suppose if he changes the Thanksgiving Turkey to be a ham then you'd point to it and say - aha, see ... that's change ... he told the truth.

When you bring in an entire staff of Clintonistas - and perhaps even Hillary herself as Secretary of State (she'd do a good job IMHO) - and when you bring in massive numbers of lobbyists even after promising not to have any in the administration - this is NOT CHANGE, but is instead the typical bait and switch tactics of corrupt politicians. Politics as usual - something that 'The One' promised he wouldn't do.

Originally posted by maybereal11
Obama cannot entirely exclude anyone who has functioned in a lobbying role in DC without eliminating 90% of qualified candidates.

He should have thought of that before he promised never to have any in his administration and to change the way Washington is run.

The facts show - No change. No hope. No unity.

edited immediately to fix spelling error

[edit on 11/18/2008 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by Silenceisall
And unlike Bush--another unqualified President at the start of his first term--Obama seems to have the abaility to learn on the job.

Bush43 - as dimwitted as he is - had more qualifications then Obama.
There is a certain amount of learning on the job with POTUS but a
severe lack of experience is a serious handicap and this country can't
afford that nowadays.

ON TOPIC - the fact is that Obama said he's change the way Washington did business AND that he'd never have lobbyists in his administration because that's the old way Washington runs. These are MAJOR themes
of his run for the White House. He isn't even in yet and he's broken
both.

Sorry , I overchopped the quote.


"Look, you can take a 2009 Lamborghini Gallardo and put a little old lady behind the wheel and you're ride will be a certain experience. When you put a professional race car driver behind the wheel, it's the same car, but your experience, as the passenger in both cases, is going to be 100% DIFFERENT.


Obama must be the little old lady behind the wheel.

Sorry, couldn't resist that little nugget.

I have nothing more to say other than I would expect a few DC pros to be selected for any new cabinet but, it appears that Obama has gone over the top here.

[edit on 18-11-2008 by jibeho]