Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's funny that you see Hilary as controlling Obama in some way and I see Obama as co-opting and marginalizing Hilary as a political opponent. By naming her as SOS he keeps her very close. She can't criticize him without getting fired and if she gets fired, then what does she have? She'll just look like a shrill has-been who can't hang with the big dogs.
As an aside, the only people Obama's appointments are surprising are those who bought into the fear-mongering that he was a Muslim socialist bent on destroying individual rights. Most of us who voted for him did so because we thought he was smart and would work his butt off for the overall good of the country. I'm not a bit surprised that he's surrounding himself with the smartest, most capable people he can find.
Not an Obama supporter at all (but as a proud American, recongnize him as our new president and will support him in the office), I agree wholeheartedly with the above in bold.
Your second paragraph, I waiver a bit. Seems his appointments don't align with the "change" mantra and are all old Washington hats, just switiching from the right side of the aisle back to the left. There is still such a love affair with Obama that his supporters are not calling him on this, but can't help but think that those who wanted and expected real "change" will be disappointed in his selections. Maybe not now, he will get a pass for quite a while, especially from the press, but the grumbling will arise before long.
Not an Obama supporter at all (but as a proud American, recongnize him as our new president and will support him in the office), I agree wholeheartedly with the above in bold.
Your second paragraph, I waiver a bit. Seems his appointments don't align with the "change" mantra and are all old Washington hats, just switiching from the right side of the aisle back to the left. There is still such a love affair with Obama that his supporters are not calling him on this, but can't help but think that those who wanted and expected real "change" will be disappointed in his selections. Maybe not now, he will get a pass for quite a while, especially from the press, but the grumbling will arise before long.
There will undoubtedly be some Obama supporters who are disappointed that he's not as liberal as they want him to be. But so far, that criticism is coming only from non-supporters who I think truly believed he was going to come into office and dismantle America as we know it and replace it with a Marxist or socialist form of government. The fear-mongering on this issue was over the top.
During the campaign, when Obama said "change" I heard that he was offering a change to the last 8 years of Bush and his lies, war-mongering, disregard for the Constitution and catering to the religious right and the super wealthy. So far, I'm not at all disappointed.
Moderator cut: Personal AttacksI've posted my suggestions as to why Hillary is very likely calling the shots in the Obama Whitehouse. You'd have to be blind , dense or a tinfoil helmet wearing Obama groupy to not at least wonder if its possible.
Hillary and Obama do not like each other. He took her job. He stole the primary from her. She did get more primary votes, remember? Bill Clinton doesn't like him. So why would she allow him to win?
Had she moved to derail his candidacy she'd have burned bridges in her party that she'd never have been able to rebuild and would have handed the win to McCain. She'd have been known as the spoilsport who gave the republican another 3rd Bush term, no matter if Obama was clearly guilty or not.
So why not let him win and then take charge from behind the scenes? She has Rahm Emmanuel as his chief of staff, she's his Secretary of State, Eric Holder, another Clinton insider is the new Attorney General. Can you connect the dots? And just what "change" has Obama produced other than the change of his own decisions on how the country should be run? He's left his own allies out in the cold or lowered their influence if they have a conflict with Hillary. Richardson, got a lower key postion. Kerry, got nothing.
I've said that I'm not completely unhappy with what Obama is doing. It may lack integrity and honesty on his part, but clearly it is better than the damage his campaign promised to do. An Obama as an empty suit but doing some of the right things is better than an Obama purposely driving the country further into a hole. That was my biggest criticism about Bush, he had the wrong people telling him what to do. Obama may not be making liberals happy( Obama groupies are not liberals), but he's also not making conservatives or centrists unhappy. But he still has to be under close scrutiny at all times.
This is just crazy. I'm wearing a tinfoil hat? You say Obama stole the primary, but that Hillary would have looked like she was derailing him if she had won? The rest is just too dense to understand.
Last edited by gallowsCalibrator; 12-03-2008 at 09:39 AM..
Reason: Fixed quote to reflect current version
There will undoubtedly be some Obama supporters who are disappointed that he's not as liberal as they want him to be. But so far, that criticism is coming only from non-supporters who I think truly believed he was going to come into office and dismantle America as we know it and replace it with a Marxist or socialist form of government. The fear-mongering on this issue was over the top.
During the campaign, when Obama said "change" I heard that he was offering a change to the last 8 years of Bush and his lies, war-mongering, disregard for the Constitution and catering to the religious right and the super wealthy. So far, I'm not at all disappointed.
I enjoy having conversations in a forum like this with people that I don't see eye to eye with politically. However, it would help, especially in the light of my being magnanimous with your candidate, if you would lay off the harsh rhetoric against Bush please.
When I heard the "change" mantra, I heard it long before the general direction, well back into the democratic primary. So for me, the change he spoke of was a new brand of governing unlike any we had seen before. This was brought up time and again when the democratic field was wide and then when it narrowed down to him and Hillary.
So the appointments now look like a lot of rehashed Clintonites. I don't see how that is any different than if Hillary won the nomination and then the general election. How is this change in light of that? Yes change in that the flip side of the coin or the pendulum swinging back to the left. But nothing like a change for something new and unique.
Just semantics I guess. In all actuality, as a conservative I am glad it isn't some off the wall, altogether new thing. Just that the promise that so many were enamored with is just the same old Washington thing, just pulled back out of storage and with a new revamped democrat label on it.
Marlow, you may see Obama as marginalizing Hillary but I see her as marginalizing him. And the spanish community is already sending him demands that he give more high ranking posts to spanish candidates in response to his snubbing Richardson over Hillary. Denial is not just a river in Egypt. And whats this about Hillary being fired? I'd say Obama is the one who should be worried about his job if he doesn't keep Hillary happy. They're already talking about Hillary running against him in 2012 in the primary. That's Fox News on Bill Oreilly for those who absolutely have to have sources laid out for them.
The funniest thing about Obama so far is that he's disappointing liberals and those who thought he'd grant special favors to them. And that he's relieving conservatives and centrists. Why, he's almost John McCain.
That is funny, hopeful, but funny.
Old saying: Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer!
Hillary in the State Department will keep her really busy and out of the country for most of the next four years thus derailing her chances of running against him in the 2012 primaries. She should have had health, education and welfare, which she knows something about, but that would have had her here in a highly visible position. Obama is playing a longer game.
It was fun watching the Clinton DINO machine get outmaneuvered in the primaries and the Republicans stopped in the election. The next few years are going to be interesting. I expect FOX snews to start a primary campaign for Hillary any day.
I enjoy having conversations in a forum like this with people that I don't see eye to eye with politically. However, it would help, especially in the light of my being magnanimous with your candidate, if you would lay off the harsh rhetoric against Bush please.
When I heard the "change" mantra, I heard it long before the general direction, well back into the democratic primary. So for me, the change he spoke of was a new brand of governing unlike any we had seen before. This was brought up time and again when the democratic field was wide and then when it narrowed down to him and Hillary.
So the appointments now look like a lot of rehashed Clintonites. I don't see how that is any different than if Hillary won the nomination and then the general election. How is this change in light of that? Yes change in that the flip side of the coin or the pendulum swinging back to the left. But nothing like a change for something new and unique.
Just semantics I guess. In all actuality, as a conservative I am glad it isn't some off the wall, altogether new thing. Just that the promise that so many were enamored with is just the same old Washington thing, just pulled back out of storage and with a new revamped democrat label on it.
Give me a couple of years and maybe I'll be able to lay off the harsh Bush rhetoric. It's too soon to forget the pi$$-poor job he's done. Oooops. Sorry.
I think (hope) Obama's presidency will be different from the Clinton presidency in that it will be less secretive, more transparent and free of scandal. I'm grateful for the 8 years of peace and prosperity we had while Bill Clinton was president, but to me, there's always an air of conniving and self-aggrandizment surrounding the Clinton's which I don't get from Obama. Maybe being the president causes that to happen. I don't know yet, but that's another change I hope we see.
Marlow, you may see Obama as marginalizing Hillary but I see her as marginalizing him. And the spanish community is already sending him demands that he give more high ranking posts to spanish candidates in response to his snubbing Richardson over Hillary. Denial is not just a river in Egypt. And whats this about Hillary being fired? I'd say Obama is the one who should be worried about his job if he doesn't keep Hillary happy. They're already talking about Hillary running against him in 2012 in the primary. That's Fox News on Bill Oreilly for those who absolutely have to have sources laid out for them.
The funniest thing about Obama so far is that he's disappointing liberals and those who thought he'd grant special favors to them. And that he's relieving conservatives and centrists. Why, he's almost John McCain.
That is funny, hopeful, but funny.
Obama is the president-elect and Hillary will serve at his pleasure. If the Clinton's were as powerful as seem to suspect they are, Hillary would be the PE and Obama would asking her for a job.
Fox News and Bill O'Reilly may be talking about Hillary running against him in 2012, but it's going to be very hard for her to do so without criticizing him, and if she criticizes him, she'll get fired.
I have yet to talk to an Obama supporter who claims to be disappointed in him. All that talk is coming from the right who kept saying he was ultra liberal and would grant special favors to liberals. It's the right who said that he's a socialist who pals around with terrorists and would take away guns, kill babies and all the rest of the scare tactics they used during the election. The vast majority of his supporters voted for him knowing that he would act just like he's been acting so far.
I have yet to talk to an Obama supporter who claims to be disappointed in him. All that talk is coming from the right who kept saying he was ultra liberal and would grant special favors to liberals. It's the right who said that he's a socialist who pals around with terrorists and would take away guns, kill babies and all the rest of the scare tactics they used during the election. The vast majority of his supporters voted for him knowing that he would act just like he's been acting so far.
Yup, just like the GOP are the only ones who ever called him a messiah.
It's all a game--first they tried to make people fear him using a bunch of extreme labels and claiming all sorts of extreme behavior. Since the fear tactic didn't work, they're trying the opposite approach: try to make people dissappointed because he doesn't behave in the same extreme ways we were all supposed to fear last month.
Sorry, that won't work either.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
