TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Obama backpeddles on just about everything.
Pages (2): [1] 2 »

Obama backpeddles on just about everything.

This from Sunday interview on This Week. Transcript

quote:

Obama Signals His Reluctance to Look Into Bush Policies Article Tools Sponsored By By DAVID JOHNSTON and CHARLIE SAVAGE Published: January 11, 2009 WASHINGTON � President-elect Barack Obama signaled in an interview broadcast Sunday that he was unlikely to authorize a broad inquiry into Bush administration programs like domestic eavesdropping or the treatment of terrorism suspects. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/u...quire.html?_r=1

quote:

Obama sees campaign promises fade In this photograph provided by ABC News, President-elect Barack Obama is interviewed by George Stephanopoulos during the taping of "This Week With George Stephanopoulos" on Saturday, Jan. 10, 2009, at the Newseum in Washington. (AP Photo/"This Week," Lauren Victoria Burke, ABC News) President-elect Barack Obama said Americans will have to sacrifice to lift the nation from recession and acknowledged that some of his campaign promises may not be fulfilled because of what he described as a dire economic situation. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...-promises-fade/

quote:

As the economic situation has grown more dire, however, Obama's advisers have hinted in recent weeks that they may wait two years and allow the tax cuts for the wealthy to expire, fearful of the impact of raising taxes during a sharp recession. And in an interview with CNBC Wednesday night, Obama himself said he had not yet decided what he would do. http://voices.washingtonpost.com/th...ml?hpid=topnews

Thing that gets me it was obvious all of these bold initiatives weren't going to be possible, especially after the economy bust. But Obama kept making strong declarations, only now reneging on them. After all the hype, he better make extraordinary progress in something or we're going to see a one term presidency. Still infinitely better than the alternative candidates.

It was inevitable. He couldn't possibly maintain the level of expectations he ran for office with. He's even retaining some of the CIA deputies that oversaw Bush's interrogation policies (Stephen R. Kappes). I know that has some of the anti-war crowd ringing their hands.

As I said before ... its becoming all too familiar.

Change that you can believe in?

I feel sorry for those who really thought he could actually change anything.

http://www.informationweek.com/news...cleID=212800199

This alone would be an amazing feat.

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer I feel sorry for those who really thought he could actually change anything.

Jesus H Christ, can we let the guy get 15 seconds actually in office before we lambast what he hasn't even attempted yet?


I agree with Josh that there is a high amount of backpeddaling happening, but this is the president of the united states. You can't just do whatever you want, it doesn't work that way. (unless you're GWB and have a Dick Cheney equivalent)

Re: Obama backpeddles on just about everything.

quote:

Originally posted by josh4 Still infinitely better than the alternative candidates.

this upcoming gynormous stimulus package crap wouldn't be nearly half as big ($1+ trillion!!!!) under a McCain presidency and would be free of pork as well and thus be "infinitely better".

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis Jesus H Christ, can we let the guy get 15 seconds actually in office before we lambast what he hasn't even attempted yet?

i agree, but...

quote:

I agree with Josh that there is a high amount of backpeddaling happening, but this is the president of the united states. You can't just do whatever you want, it doesn't work that way. (unless you're GWB and have a Dick Cheney equivalent)

...the point here is there shouldn't be such clear distinctions between what Obama has said he'd do and what he actually will do or what he's capable of doing.

Obama said a lot of things to a lot of people on the shallow effort of just trying to be chosen to be POTUS and not predicating his rhetoric on the fact of what he will do once he is POTUS. they're two different things and thats just wrong however you look at it if you don't see him for what he truly is, a politician. thats not his fault to be honest, it's your fault

as far as being the POTUS and not being able to do what you want is absurd. the very nature of the office and the laws that apply to it afforded to him by the Constitution are, for one man, very broad and in many ways omnipotent with respect to his/her branch of government.

NOTHING Bush has done in Office the last 8 years hasn't been done previously by other Presidents...NOTHING! he just took it to a different level and you can make your arguments from there. but to say in the same breath that a POTUS isn't free to do "whatever he wants" then say that the previous President did makes no sense if you have been paying attention.

I don't mean literally, I mean politically. George Bush had absolutely 0 qualms fucking anyone over politically unless they were Republican and did what he wanted.

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis George Bush had absolutely 0 qualms fucking anyone over politically unless they were Republican and did what he wanted.

really? how about immigration?

...or the TARP?...or the SURGE! plenty of GOP annimosity has been going around for years, YEARS!!!!!!!!!!! but again, you don't pay attention

this isn't and shouldnt be about W

Ooooo! Shocking!

"What is new about this transition, or at least relatively new�unlike the Carter-Reagan, Reagan-Bush, Bush-Clinton, and Clinton-Bush change-overs�is that an entire sector of the country has been convinced by an intellectual establishment�in the media, universities, foundations, the fringes of the Democratic Party, the arts, Hollywood, etc.�that Obama arrives to end quasi-fascistic rule and radically change U.S. foreign policy to win back over the world's good will."

But when we look at actual specifics and ignore the boilerplate mainstream liberal rhetoric about "multilateralism" and "rebuilding our alliances," and also ignore the "inside" horror stories (cf. the recent Vanity Fair Bush hit-piece) by failures and opportunists like a Scott McClellan or Matthew Dowd, we really do not see very much.

Already there is back-peddling on FISA, the Patriot Act, and renditions. Who knows what the plan is on Gitmo, other than to keep promising prompt its closing, while keeping it open as lawyers wonder whether Khalid Sheik Mohammed might in fact welcome a federal trial in D.C. or New York�in hopes
that one juror could be found to be sympathetic to a radical Islamic agenda and thus nullify the evidence presented and free the ultimate murderer of 3,000 innocents?

I don't doubt that hope and change rhetoric, from a non-traditional charismatic leader, won't do some good abroad, but on key issues�Iraq, Afghanistan, probably the Middle East and Iran, NATO, missile defense, China, India, North Korea, etc.�Sec. Clinton won't be doing much differently from Sec. Rice. Sec. Gates won't be different from Sec. Gates. One can scream "neo-con" all day long, but at the end of the day getting rid of two horrific dangerous regimes, and promoting democracy in their place for 50 million people is hardly John Foster Dulles redux.

Perhaps on climate change there will be a break with the past. But recent studies suggesting the evidence on manmade planet warming is far from clear, coupled with a recession (nothing stops greenhouse gases like plant shutdowns and less driving), argue likewise that Obama, despite the soaring wind and solar rhetoric, may not rush to reintroduce Kyoto and that his policies will be closer to the last two years of Bush than to Al Gore's.

In short, Bush's supposedly diabolical neocon foreign policy was actually pretty mainstream other than the cacophony�over removing Saddam and staying on to foster democracy�in fall 2002-spring 2003. Obama's alternative world view was pretty much campaign rhetoric to position himself to the left of Hillary in the primary and sound hip to the big-donor liberal Left and is passing with the seasons.

On matters of a "new ethos" and "not doing business as usual," I think one could legitimately argue that the Obama transition ethical lapses�Richardson, the Treasury Secretary nominee's Rangelesque tax problems, the Blago tapes to come surrounding the Obama Senate seat�already dwarf the surrealistic Libby matter during the eight years of the Bush administration. And when the administration actually begins, we will have dozens of Clintonites on the loose bumping into an equal number of Daleyite Chicagoans�an interesting ethical nexus to say the least, as Rahm Emanuel may emblemize.

What are we left, then, other than a sort of campaign con? Obama will better articulate the old Bush positions. The hard Left will quiet down about the Patriot Act and Iraq,and cease the anti-American rhetoric, as upbeat diversity rhetoric trumps the old downbeat unilateralism.Michael Moore won't be making any more documentaries about a fascistic President, and Knopf won't be publishing any novels like Checkpoint about a sitting President. I think Obama, with a few low-level appointments, an occasional pep talk at the annual ACLU meeting or an invite to the editors of The Nation for a chat in the Oval Office, can pretty much count on an inexpensive 10-cents-on-the dollar bought ride from the once vociferous Left.

The mass hysteria will subside, and historians will come to apprise the Hope and Change summer and fall of 2008 as one of the most curious episodes of mass hysteria in American history. And now let the governance begin."

VDH

Re: Re: Obama backpeddles on just about everything.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo this upcoming gynormous stimulus package crap wouldn't be nearly half as big ($1+ trillion!!!!) under a McCain presidency and would be free of pork as well and thus be "infinitely better".

I love how the guy preaching about consistency is a McCain supporter. Grow up.

Re: Re: Re: Obama backpeddles on just about everything.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov I love how the guy preaching about consistency is a McCain supporter. Grow up.

who said anything about inconsistency? it's a concistent fact, a running gag, Democrats will spend till they're blue in the face when given the oppurtunity. no one assumed Obama would be the one to break that paradigm, i sure as hell didn't. and here we are, not even President yet and he's just getting warmed up with a cool $1 trillion in new additional spending and pork. now thats consistency.

it's more than a fair assumption McCain wouldn't be anywhere near $1+ trillion dollars if he was forced to initiate a new stimulus. it's true and you know it. either prove me otherwise or shut your fucking trap.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Obama backpeddles on just about everything.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo who said anything about inconsistency?

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo ...the point here is there shouldn't be such clear distinctions between what Obama has said he'd do and what he actually will do or what he's capable of doing.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Obama backpeddles on just about everything.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo and here we are, not even President yet and he's just getting warmed up with a cool $1 trillion in new additional spending and pork. now thats consistency.

it's almost universally recognized by economists that we need an enormous spending package to prevent more job losses and hopefully create some jobs.

....and a stimulus package is not pork. pork spending is when a senator or congressman appropriates government spending for the benefit of a specific constituent (e.g., a senator appropriates funding to build a highway that will benefit a developer within the senators state).

I'd like to add this to the backpedaling:

Remember at the debate when Obama vowed, "We will kill Bin Laden, we will crush al-Qaeda"? (http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...politicalticker) He's stressed the importance of taking out Osama on other occasions, but never quite as forcefully as that. Change of plans:

quote:

COURIC: How important do you think it is, Mr. President-elect, to apprehend Osama bin Laden? OBAMA: I think that we have to so weaken his infrastructure that, whether he is technically alive or not, he is so pinned down that he cannot function. My preference obviously would be to capture or kill him. But if we have so tightened the noose that he's in a cave somewhere and can't even communicate with his operatives then we will meet our goal of protecting America.

http://thepage.time.com/obama-talks...s-katie-couric/

This is the counterterror equivalent of Obama promising that he'll save three million jobs: He "succeeds" merely by maintaining the status quo. If pinning down Osama so that he can't function is the goal, the goal was met literally years ago. Cofer Black described Bin Laden as far back as 2004 as having been reduced to a figurehead whose operational role had been taken over by Zawahiri; NBC's investigative team talked to intel officials this past summer and found that judgment still held. In a speech given just two months ago, CIA chief Michael Hayden described it this way:

quote:

Osama bin Laden is alive and "putting a lot of energy into his own security," the director of the CIA, General Michael Hayden, said today. Without directly referring to the CIA's offensive blitz of unmanned missile attacks in the tribal areas of Pakistan, the CIA boss said the US had successfully isolated the al Qaeda leader bin Laden, referring to him in the present tense. "He appears to be largely isolated from the day-to-day operations of the organization he leads," Hayden said in a speech delivered to the Atlantic Council in Washington.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=6248595&page=1

I'm not saying Obama is wrong; he isn't. If they can't operate, they are effectively neutralized. Oddly though, the Left never saw it that way with Bush. I wonder if they'll see it now.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo really? how about immigration? ...or the TARP?...or the SURGE! plenty of GOP annimosity has been going around for years, YEARS!!!!!!!!!!! but again, you don't pay attention this isn't and shouldnt be about W

Actually, I pay very close attention, and you once again seem unable to understand my version of the english language.

You can't do "whatever you want" as president if you want to achieve certain goals and you know you need bipartisan support, or want to include political adversaries in your plans. Obama wants to work with people, he wants to be inclusive and not exclusive. That requires a great deal of compromise and willingness to give the other side breaks. Bush & Cheney had little to no need for partisanship or including political adversaries in their decisions and agenda. They mostly did what they wanted how they wanted and anyone who disagreed pretty much was given the finger.

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis They mostly did what they wanted how they wanted and anyone who disagreed pretty much was given the finger.

or called unpatriotic...

quote:

Originally posted by hardcore trancer I feel sorry for those who really thought he could actually change anything.

You're right - Obama won't change me. I'll still be same ol' dick.

For fucks sake people, the man ain't even swore in and you people are foaming at the mouth... hating bunch of bastards!

quote:

This picture of Barack Obama is the first official presidential portrait ever taken by a digital camera. The details are in the EXIF data. It was taken by Pete Souza, the official White House photographer, with a Canon 5D Mark II. According to the EXIF data, it was shot last night at 5:38pm. The settings: 1/125 exposure, F/10.0, 105mm focal length, ISO 100, no flash.

he need to run that brush through his head before taking any pictures in the future


but remember in 4 years what he looks like now..... i bet he is going to age fast as shit.....especially once he finds out about the space ships from other planets.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obama backpeddles on just about everything.

quote:

Originally posted by jerZ07002 it's almost universally recognized by economists that we need an enormous spending package to prevent more job losses and hopefully create some jobs.

its universally recognised $800 billion is going to produce 3.6 million jobs?

quote:

....and a stimulus package is not pork. pork spending is when a senator or congressman appropriates government spending for the benefit of a specific constituent (e.g., a senator appropriates funding to build a highway that will benefit a developer within the senators state).

are you telling me there are no earmarks in this?

Re: Re: Obama backpeddles on just about everything.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo this upcoming gynormous stimulus package crap wouldn't be nearly half as big ($1+ trillion!!!!) under a McCain presidency and would be free of pork as well and thus be "infinitely better".

can i just say lol? mccain knows about as much about the economy as my left nut. he would've been pushed in whatever direction his advisers chose.

quote:

Originally posted by Clovis Jesus H Christ, can we let the guy get 15 seconds actually in office before we lambast what he hasn't even attempted yet?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Obama backpeddles on just about everything.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo its universally recognised $800 billion is going to produce 3.6 million jobs?

i have no idea how many jobs it will save or produce. although my gut says it will save more jobs than it will produce.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo are you telling me there are no earmarks in this?

not at all, i have no idea. What i'm saying is that a stimulus plan isn't on its face pork spending.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.