November 11, 2008
— Gabriel Malor This is more of an addendum to last night's post than anything else. Obama appears to be abandoning his promised commitment to end government torture.
As a candidate, Mr. Obama said the CIA's interrogation program should adhere to the same rules that apply to the military, which would prohibit the use of techniques such as waterboarding. He has also said the program should be investigated.Upon review, Mr. Obama may decide he wants to keep the road open in certain cases for the CIA to use techniques not approved by the military, but with much greater oversight.
Advisers caution that few decisions will be made until the team gets a better picture of how the Bush administration actually goes about gathering intelligence, including covert programs, and there could be a greater shift after a full review.
I say "appears" to be flopping because this has all the hallmarks of the other situations where he comes along in 8 hours and offers a "clarification". First, the information comes from Obama's advisers, who apparently think they are authorized to make these kinds of decisions and release them to the media. Second, it's bound to upset some very loudmouthed folks on the Left. The President-elect's usual response to that is to declare that no decisions have been made and "please don't hurt me."
Now, don't get me wrong. I'd love it if Obama saw some sense when it comes to intelligence policy; maybe when he gets some security briefings, he will. But this is another situation where he doesn't seem to stand for anything because the men and women on his team aren't taking direction from him, but rather doing what they want and saying it's all in His Name.
The Administration-elect is only a week old and already it's foundering because of a lack of leadership.
Posted by: Gabriel Malor at
06:05 AM
| Comments (134)
Post contains 310 words, total size 2 kb.
This country is run by people we didn't elect !
Posted by: Phineas D. Troofer at November 11, 2008 06:08 AM (7FA9S)
Posted by: toby wan kenobi at November 11, 2008 06:08 AM (evdj2)
Posted by: stace at November 11, 2008 06:10 AM (JO0c/)
Posted by: tachyonshuggy at November 11, 2008 06:11 AM (TXp3z)
Posted by: IreneFingIrene at November 11, 2008 06:11 AM (lhxhu)
Posted by: Twinks at November 11, 2008 06:12 AM (7QUxD)
Posted by: SalvucciFumbles at November 11, 2008 06:12 AM (93ZN1)
Posted by: Eeyore's Swinging Sack at November 11, 2008 06:13 AM (8/1Qu)
Posted by: IreneFingIrene at November 11, 2008 06:13 AM (lhxhu)
Another fault line to add to "gays vs blacks" and "Enviros vs auto workers".
I'm not sure whether to feel amusement or pity for the people who spent the last several years screeching about "Bush torture". I guess I'll settle for contempt.
Posted by: flenser at November 11, 2008 06:14 AM (D2n1f)
Posted by: Eric at November 11, 2008 06:15 AM (quZLX)
But I kinda doubt it.
Posted by: Eric at November 11, 2008 06:16 AM (quZLX)
Now you're talkin.
Posted by: Vinman at November 11, 2008 06:17 AM (idc+/)
Posted by: kefka at November 11, 2008 06:19 AM (fKivs)
He has been the President elect for a week and he or members of his team
have had to backtrack, clarify or repudiate something that was said or promised in his name. It's going to be a *fascinating 4 years.
* And by fascinating I mean fraught with peril and danger that might
not be possible to undo.
Posted by: McLovin at November 11, 2008 06:20 AM (RwvN1)
Posted by: flenser at November 11, 2008 06:20 AM (D2n1f)
Posted by: Iwillnotsubmit at November 11, 2008 06:20 AM (JOGUZ)
Posted by: Long Island at November 11, 2008 06:22 AM (9f5NQ)
Posted by: Michelle's American White Racist at November 11, 2008 06:23 AM (NLtVk)
His entire campaign was built on this concept .......get used to it.
Posted by: GarandFan at November 11, 2008 06:24 AM (eJ32B)
Forget it people, this is just another one of those test the waters leaks. A sort of informal poll to determine if it offends his allies in the media.
Posted by: Vic at November 11, 2008 06:27 AM (Qd7GC)
That's gotta be some rich thick irony there.
Posted by: Techie at November 11, 2008 06:28 AM (EVMm7)
Once he nominates Bork to the Supreme Court our master plan will be complete.
Posted by: flenser at November 11, 2008 06:28 AM (D2n1f)
Posted by: Techie at November 11, 2008 06:29 AM (EVMm7)
Posted by: markytom at November 11, 2008 06:31 AM (ZG9as)
Posted by: Michael Laurence at November 11, 2008 06:32 AM (o10gU)
I'm sure when he got the briefings detailing the various terrorist groups that are and always will be plotting to assassinate the POTUS, his perspective on the situation got a bit more personal.
It is an enduring truth that things look different when they're shooting at you.
Posted by: gebrauchshund at November 11, 2008 06:32 AM (pY77a)
Posted by: feeling paranoid at November 11, 2008 06:33 AM (B/Y39)
Posted by: jp at November 11, 2008 06:33 AM (DFDtC)
Posted by: SalvucciFumbles at November 11, 2008 06:33 AM (93ZN1)
Posted by: Matt at November 11, 2008 06:34 AM (ecpMe)
Obama wanted to get elected, and everyone behind him saw a blank slate onto which they could project their own desires. That seems to be what's happening, why there are so many voices that claim one thing, then counter it later that day. His advisers, etc, are probably ignoring him and going for what they want.
Since he's never been criticised (or ever taken any of it to heart, anyway) I'm sure he's fairly baffled by all this.
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at November 11, 2008 06:39 AM (kLWtB)
Heh. Looks like they may be waking Mr. Obama up in the morning with a hot, steaming cup of "the world is a lot more complicated than I thought".
At least, this is what I hope is the case.
Posted by: OregonMuse at November 11, 2008 06:45 AM (FO+YO)
I think this is Gabe's best work yet. I have been pondering these issues: what happens when the new pres can't make any real moves because they will cause serious international, economic, and security problems? He will be undermined and blasted by those who chose him. Unfortunately there is a house of cards about to be collapsed, and there will only be "hope for a little change" left.
Happy Veterans Day to all of you morons who served or are still serving.
Posted by: MAJ O at November 11, 2008 06:47 AM (HSw8j)
Posted by: Frank at November 11, 2008 06:47 AM (e8WL2)
I have believed from the beginning that he will probably govern as a moderate. He is focusing on the next election and will want to make little changes as he goes along, nothing too big that will shock the sensibilities of the citizenry.
He is going to suck, that's for sure, but I see his flip flopping as a positive sign.
My biggest concern is the economy and immigration, he is wrong on both of these so that is where he will probably suck the most donkey.
Posted by: Uniball at November 11, 2008 06:49 AM (27iEn)
I remember when McCain voted down that bill that would limit the CIA to using army field manual techniques. All the loopy lefties were screaming that McCain voted for torture. Is the loony left saying the same thing about Obama? Pfft. What am I talking about? These freaks never let hypocrisy stand in the way of running their mouths. (The funny thing is, they're clueless about their own hypocrisy. They really think they're being consistent.)
This could also be a classic case of not realizing what is really going on until you get those Presidential Daily Briefings.
I think you've got it. I don't think this change is due to his conflicting interest groups. However, I think those conflicting interest groups are bound to come to a head during his term:
Hispanics versus Unions with regard to immigration reform
Nanny state afficianados versus Investment Banker types (he got a crap load of money from Wall Street) with regard to increased taxes (esp capital gains)
Jewish voters versus neo-con conspiracy theorist liberals with regard to Israel
We've already seen one conflict play out: Black voters that supported Prop 8 (70%) versus gay voters
Posted by: Tversky at November 11, 2008 06:50 AM (ypxZL)
The sphere in which he will do real damage is in the greater reliance upon the government by an ever larger portion of the populace. That's where we need to fight tooth and nail.
There used to be a time when the Democrat/Republican approaches to foreign policy were almost identical. The real struggle was always about how to define the role of the government in our day to day lives. And if conservatives can get back to our traditional stance there, that will be our winning message.
Posted by: xbradtc at November 11, 2008 06:51 AM (q6Nct)
Posted by: toby928 at November 11, 2008 06:51 AM (evdj2)
Posted by: roy at November 11, 2008 06:57 AM (cB77O)
This is worrisome, from a 'stand back and take in the big picture' perspective. I mean, a bad plan is better than no plan at all, and I really think that Obama's (if not the entire Democratic party's) plan was simply Not Bush.
Not Bush is not a plan. They don't have a plan. And they've cultivated a base for eight years whose main political philosophy was Not Bush.
Now they have to go from being a mere negative, to some sort of positive, proactive governance and execution of what Bush was unable to wrap up in his eight years.
Instead of speaking real pretty, Obama now has to act.
In a way, I wish Obama luck. He needs it, as we do. But I'm sure it's our enemies in the Middle East, Russia, and Venezuela who consider themselves lucky right now.
Posted by: Lee at November 11, 2008 06:59 AM (TxTIh)
Posted by: seyont at November 11, 2008 07:00 AM (FcR7P)
Sure. But Obama's most passionate supporters, at least on the internet, have made Bush's "spying" and "torture" their Number One Issue. So I'm going to enjoy their reactions to this.
Posted by: flenser at November 11, 2008 07:00 AM (D2n1f)
We can probably expect an Obama Action Email alert everytime a White House toilet flushes
Nah, we will just hear that OBama lost another advisor.
Posted by: Vic at November 11, 2008 07:02 AM (Qd7GC)
The one reason I favored Hillary over Obama is that I knew she could be pushed to accept sensible policies under political duress and the demands of the realities of governance. To be honest, I am very glad that this appears to be true of Obama as well. So what if he's fucking Zelig, just so's he is OUR fucking Zelig.
We'll kneecap the bastard in the next election with his betrayal of his base, but for now it's a matter of positive and negative reinforcement - carrot and the stick. He drops AWB, pat him on the head, "nice doggie." He talks about releasing Gitmo thugs, whack him with a newspaper.
Posted by: Ronsonic at November 11, 2008 07:03 AM (ywSvi)
I've never understood this. Dude's got the most liberal voting record in the Senate. That's hardly a blank slate.
Posted by: OregonMuse at November 11, 2008 07:03 AM (FO+YO)
Posted by: floofyparisparamus at November 11, 2008 07:04 AM (HWchM)
Of course I've always thought that the majority of them were only anti-war because they were anti-Bush, so they'll get over it quickly.
Posted by: flenser at November 11, 2008 07:06 AM (D2n1f)
I'm sure when he got the briefings detailing the various terrorist groups that are and always will be plotting to assassinate the POTUS, his perspective on the situation got a bit more personal.
It is an enduring truth that things look different when they're shooting at you.
There's that, and there's also my suspicion that those briefings involved "here are the three or four 9/11-scale terroriss attacks we'ved stopped the past 7 years, here's the actionable intelligence we used to stop them, and here's how we got that info at Gitmo." To which The One's reaction has been "OHSHITOHSHITOHSHITOHSHIT" as the enormity of the reality of what he's actually getting into hits him in the face and makes him piss himself in panic and wish McCain had won.
Most of his "advisers" don't get access to those briefings.
Posted by: Dave J at November 11, 2008 07:06 AM (qsGH+)
Posted by: Larsen E. Whipsnade at November 11, 2008 07:06 AM (6BgmB)
HuffPo has disabled comments for that story.
And just how soon after January 20 before Barry is gonna be looking around for a [ Disable Comments ] button of his very own?! Look for some sort of "Fairness in Media Council" or somesuch crap to be set up to allow him to "guide" the media. And all the big bad brave defenders of our right to know? They will fall over each other to see who can sell out the fastest, the better to curry the most favor. You just watch.
Posted by: sherlock at November 11, 2008 07:09 AM (G9/8V)
The Administration-elect is only a week old and already it's foundering because of a lack of leadership.
Yeah, it's a fuckin' mess already.
Posted by: Nyctalus Lasiopterus at November 11, 2008 07:13 AM (N+Ydc)
Posted by: IC at November 11, 2008 07:15 AM (jZNCU)
And if we can help facilitate this scenario through a little disinformation, maskirovka and political guerrilla warfare, that would be an honorable endeavor.
Posted by: IllTemperedCur at November 11, 2008 07:16 AM (Ds4I5)
This is pretty much Obama's SOP - he puts a staffer out to float potentially controversial topics, and if there's adverse reaction he calmly disavows the staffer's "inartful" words. How many staffers has he fired or disciplined for freewheeling, making up policy as they go?
Somewhere between not any and none. Which tells me they are not making it up as they go, but operating according to Obama's directions.
Posted by: Steve Skubinna at November 11, 2008 07:17 AM (1ii59)
Posted by: iconoclast at November 11, 2008 07:18 AM (diwkJ)
Posted by: Dave J at November 11, 2008 07:22 AM (qsGH+)
Posted by: Andrew at November 11, 2008 07:22 AM (VKG9j)
Just saying it may be a good instructional video for this administration.
Posted by: SoCalSteeler at November 11, 2008 07:22 AM (ZXbck)
Posted by: Bryan C at November 11, 2008 07:26 AM (T3KlW)
Why is it I get the distinct impression that Obama is just a front man/puppet?
I'm sure he knows that he's being pulled, I just wonder if he's aware of how many and how tuff those strings are. He may yet shed those, or he may just become a manequin ("stick to the State dinners and partys, Barry"). I can only hope that the intercine warfare in the O administration doesn't hurt the US too bad.
Posted by: blogRot at November 11, 2008 07:26 AM (EKMxC)
Posted by: ed at November 11, 2008 07:28 AM (Urhve)
This is pretty much Obama's SOP - he puts a staffer out to float potentially controversial topics, and if there's adverse reaction he calmly disavows the staffer's "inartful" words.
Clinton did the same thing.
Start watching public opinion polls on different issues. There will be polls showing support for liberal issues like taxpayer funded abortions for teenagers, etc. -- the MSM will trumpet results and Obama will propose federal programs to implement them. That's how Clinton worked. Obama will do the same.
Posted by: Tinian at November 11, 2008 07:31 AM (Ohodx)
If I was a leaker in the Obama administration I'd be afraid to leak to the MSM. They'd probably refuse to run the story, and would also inform my boss of my disloyalty. The media are Obama's enforcers, not his watchdogs.
Posted by: flenser at November 11, 2008 07:31 AM (D2n1f)
I can easily picture Obama going toward two extremes: Carter or Kennedy.
Carter wanted to pull our troops out of South Korea because of Park Chung-Hee's authoritarian rule. He also lowered the status of US relations with the likes of Iran due to human rights issues.
Kennedy, however, was a black ops kinda guy who wanted to kill Castro.
I'd have to guess Obama would lean much more toward the Kennedy school of using power quietly than Carter's trying to practice what he preached.
Obama is the kind of ego that gets opponents tossed off ballots, uses ACORN, and shuts down the default screening of campaign donations. --- I got to figure he is arrogant enough to be willing to play dirty if he thought HIS government was on the side of the righteous.
Carter had that sincere Christian doubt about even power he controlled. I don't see that in Obama's past and recent political moves.
Posted by: usinkorea at November 11, 2008 07:32 AM (lqgct)
"Why is it I get the distinct impression that Obama is just a front man/puppet?"
I doubt that very much. If so, who's the puppet-master - Joe Biden?
No, this is a guy who has spent his career reading obtuse books on social theory, sliding out of every tough situation he could possibly avoid (remember the ~130 "present" votes?), and who sold himself nine ways from Sunday in order to build up an overwhelming war chest for the election.
But now this oleaginous fellow finds himself in a situation where (1) there's no running or hiding, and (2) the folks who shelled out that $600 million want their money's worth, but (3) the hard, nasty, sharp-cornered world demands tough decisions that affect the lives of millions and the fate of nations.
Well, 52, you wanted your snake-oil salesman, you got your snake-oil salesman. Reality is a bitch, isn't it?
Posted by: Brown Line at November 11, 2008 07:34 AM (VrNoa)
Folks,
Obama's first major scandal, the intentional disabling the AVS security system on his credit card donations page, has officially been swept under the rug, forever.
The FEC will not audit the Obama campaign's fundraising, because he's now a "sitting president."
Politico:
"Obama is expected to escape that level of scrutiny mostly because he declined an $84 million public grant for his campaign that automatically triggers an audit and because the sheer volume of cash he raised and spent minimizes the significance of his errors. Another factor: The FEC, which would have to vote to launch an audit, is prone to deadlocking on issues that inordinately impact one party or the other like approving a messy and high-profile probe of a sitting president."
Posted by: geoff - anti-Harkonnen freedom fighter at November 11, 2008 07:36 AM (5r0Tz)
"I say "appears" to be flopping because this has all the hallmarks of the other situations where he comes along in 8 hours and offers a "clarification"."
Hillary supporters have a name for this we call it his WORM or "what Obama Really Meant" since he oftens says something, (usually slips up and tells the truth about his thoughts or plans) and then when there is outrage a few hours later they come out with a WORM and changes things completely.. And of course the MSM never calls him on his original statement.
I predict many many WORMs
Posted by: Lyn at November 11, 2008 07:42 AM (a3abx)
Posted by: TomJW at November 11, 2008 07:42 AM (xRCpL)
Posted by: mrkwong at November 11, 2008 07:45 AM (G8Eo0)
obama might be keeping it an option to use once his buddy ayers gets those re-education camps after the take over is complete!!
Posted by: paul t at November 11, 2008 07:48 AM (5z06n)
No surprise there. Why follow the rules when no one cares enough to enforce them? You can bet the FEC will crawl up the Republican's asses in 2010 and 2012. They will have to make sure the election is fair don't ya know. We get the government that we deserve.
Posted by: kefka at November 11, 2008 07:49 AM (fKivs)
So, the FEC's policy is: "It's only fraud if you lose"...??
The hell?
Posted by: Techie at November 11, 2008 07:50 AM (EVMm7)
Techie-
Sad but true. FEC will now get a few dems to fill the empty seats and it will be majority Dem, never to vote for an investigation of Obama's fundraising no matter what.
Sad but true.
The conservative media needs to get on this, pronto, especially the foreign money issue made possible by no AVS.
That can't be swept under the rug.
Posted by: geoff - anti-Harkonnen freedom fighter at November 11, 2008 07:55 AM (5r0Tz)
"But now this oleaginous fellow..."
Oleaginous? Very nice, Brown Line. Busting out the big words.
Posted by: Lee at November 11, 2008 07:57 AM (TxTIh)
Hrm - Fuhurprinzip sounds pretty familiar to that.
Ye gads, how did we elect him?!?!
Posted by: Rob at November 11, 2008 07:58 AM (du87N)
That would be all issues, wouldn't it? Or does it mean that the FEC will do a sterling job at auditing the Constitution Party?
Posted by: flenser at November 11, 2008 08:00 AM (D2n1f)
I would not want to be the person who comes to work in a red shirt under Obama.
(think Start Trek)
Obama: Okay, [looking around] ummmmmmm, you! In the red shirt. Go um tell them we're uh uh uh thinking about er um uh this and we'll um uh er see what the um er um reaction is.
Guy in the red shirt: Fuck.
Posted by: wiserbud at November 11, 2008 08:01 AM (IHbof)
Posted by: Bald Ninja at November 11, 2008 08:09 AM (4pdbX)
Posted by: Joey Plugs at November 11, 2008 08:10 AM (aaGD+)
Posted by: IC at November 11, 2008 08:15 AM (jZNCU)
The Administration-elect is only a week old and already it's foundering because of a lack of leadership.
Yeah, it's a fuckin' mess already.
Remember when that shit-for-brains Harry Reid pronounced the surge "a failure" and the war to be "lost" about a week into it? Well, I think we should start referring to "the failed Obama administration" every chance we get.
Posted by: OregonMuse at November 11, 2008 08:16 AM (FO+YO)
Posted by: kefka at November 11, 2008 08:16 AM (fKivs)
Posted by: Dan Collins at November 11, 2008 08:18 AM (IsPT1)
I bet Waterboarding will be considered humane, since it is a quick and does not have lasting effects.
Posted by: Robin Mac at November 11, 2008 08:22 AM (6uXZa)
I wonder how our enemies would react if they were actually scared of being caught and subjected to (ahem) interrogation? Like Jack Bauer does?
Posted by: BackwardsBoy at November 11, 2008 08:34 AM (ZGhSv)
Heh. Maybe he'll be wanting to try it out on a few right-wing bloggers who dare criticize him.
Posted by: OregonMuse at November 11, 2008 08:34 AM (FO+YO)
Media: McCain gracious in loss. Bush shows grace handing off to Obama. Hey, we figured out the Republicans we like. The ones who are leaving!
Posted by: CJ at November 11, 2008 08:35 AM (JQtNT)
Posted by: Brown Line at November 11, 2008 08:36 AM (VrNoa)
This is why waterboarding should be enjoying widespread and extensive use, especially during Cabinet meetings.
Posted by: OregonMuse at November 11, 2008 08:37 AM (FO+YO)
Posted by: Barry O. at November 11, 2008 08:43 AM (PWj7B)
Besides, he will probably be permitted to use military force, torture and nuclear weapons indiscriminately without a peep from the media/Dems.
Don't forget the Democrat party motto:
Party uber alles.
Posted by: the real joe at November 11, 2008 08:45 AM (NJ/RA)
"Obama is the kind of ego that gets opponents tossed off ballots'
7 of 9 - all your hubby wanted was a threesome !
now we're all borg'ed
Posted by: meleager at November 11, 2008 08:46 AM (itQNS)
I have believed from the beginning that he will probably govern as a moderate. He is focusing on the next election and will want to make little changes as he goes along, nothing too big that will shock the sensibilities of the citizenry.
He is going to suck, that's for sure, but I see his flip flopping as a positive sign.
I too am heartened by O's potential pragmatism. I'd rather have an ambitious political type who bends with the times (i.e. Clinton) than a true-believer ideologue (Carter) from the other side.
Taxes are going up, bad, but if we can keep the remaining damage to a minimum, the country should be fine.
Posted by: moronizer at November 11, 2008 08:46 AM (p1s9n)
This is where we find out if there is anything at all behind the image.
Several have come to that office ill prepared and/or beholden to all sorts of special interests. For some, the office changed them, and made them more than anyone ever expected. I'd put Truman in that category. For others, the office overwhelmed them and they buried their heads in the sand (ex. Carter).
Obama doesn't strike me as a "the buck stops here" kinda guy, but I'm willing to give him a chance to prove it one way or the other. Initial results aren't looking too good though...
Posted by: Purple Avenger at November 11, 2008 08:53 AM (OqXyp)
It's climate fraud and a whole lot of little regulatory issues, social-justice activism at the DOJ, etc. where his administration seems likely to have the most potential to get away with real damage to our quality of life.
Posted by: mrkwong at November 11, 2008 08:55 AM (G8Eo0)
Posted by: nygal at November 11, 2008 08:57 AM (+/c0N)
You're all missing the really important thing here. Sullivan is going to go into heartache overload if this shit keeps up.
First, blacks overwhelmingly voted against Prop 8 in CA and Obama was right there cheering them on.
Now, torture! After years of screaming for Bush and Cheney to be tried on war crimes, The One is going to use the same policies as Bush (and Clinton used).
Anything that makes this deranged drama queen's asshole/party tunnel pucker is a source of never ending joy.
Posted by: JackStraw at November 11, 2008 08:57 AM (VW9/y)
Posted by: nygal at November 11, 2008 08:58 AM (+/c0N)
And if we can help facilitate this scenario through a little disinformation, maskirovka and political guerrilla warfare, that would be an honorable endeavor.
Aww, but the beauty of this situation is that we wont have to use disinformation at all. We can use his actual words and most importantly his actions. Remember right after Barry wrapped up the Democratic nomination and started moving to the center? He voted for FISA, came out in support of faith based initiatives, supported off-shore oil drilling, changed from a strict time-tables based withdrawal from Iraq to a conditions based withdrawal, etc. That was one of the only times during the campaign that his followers seemed to waver. He survived by using his truly awesome manipulation skills (on the naïve, trusting, deeply illogical, etc.) to sell these flip-flops as nuance or alternatively What he needs to do right now to win the general election. Once hes in office hell revert to his true blue lib ways. But now hes going to have to actually make choices. Theres no voting present. Voting present worked in the State Senate. It worked in the US Senate. It even worked during the financial meltdown ( i.e., The fault lies with 8 years of George Bushs failed policies followed by Uh, call me if you need me.) The stock market is showing it wont work now that hes president (e.g., his uninformative first press conference (to be fair, we did learn his daughters are getting a hypo-allergenic dog) and his reluctance to name a Treasury Secretary or answer whether he still intends to raise taxes during a recession is causing alot of market uncertainty IMO.)
The more decisions Barry makes the more people hell alienate. <grins> Several months ago I told an Obama supporter that the only thing Im certain will happen if Obama wins is that hell disappoint someone. Too many people with varying interests supported him. My bitter cold black heart is comforted by this fact. ;-)
Posted by: Tversky at November 11, 2008 09:06 AM (ypxZL)
Probably even worse. The hard left has never had any problem with brutal suppression of enemies and/or throwing them into secret prisons.
Posted by: Purple Avenger at November 11, 2008 09:08 AM (OqXyp)
Obama's first job is to win a second term. His second job is not to get the Dems killed in the 2010 midterms. Everything else he does, like protecting and upholding the constitution, etc, is subordinate to that inescapable fact.
Not wanting to spend the last two years of his one term presidency dealing with a Republican congress; should moderate his worst impulses. He is a politcal animal; unfortunalely its harder to vote Present in the White House.
Posted by: Jean at November 11, 2008 09:11 AM (L64A6)
Posted by: adam h at November 11, 2008 09:13 AM (bijvq)
Posted by: Picric at November 11, 2008 09:18 AM (+hnIk)
If Obama were to suddenly pursue a policy of fiscal responsibility and small government, would it make sense to complain about it?
Don't punish him for moving in the right direction simply because he's moving.
Complain when he moves in the wrong direction.
Charles at LGF is right when he says Country First.
Posted by: Lee at November 11, 2008 09:29 AM (LxqQW)
I'm not so worried about the 'remaining damage' in the area of foreign policy, et al - I figure that he's going to stuff his cabinet with Clinton retreads there, so it won't be great but it won't be awful.
Im not totally comforted by that idea mrkwong. Certainly, Id be relieved to a degree if Obama picked DLC I love America centrist Dems (which is the Clinton wing of the Dem party) over the Kennedy/Soros Blame America first wing of the Democratic Party. But wasnt Clintons foreign policy a bit of a clusterfuck? I think the reason many people dont remember that is because Clinton was smart enough to internalize the message (via Greenspan and Rubins tutelage from what Ive read) keep your grubby fingers out of the economy and lucky enough to preside over the post-Soviet era. But in general, if Im not mistaken, Clintons foreign policy was kind of a mess, wasnt it? He didnt know what he was doing at all.
Speaking of foreign policy, Id like the next GOP presidential candidate to advocate a more modest foreign policy. Not the borderline-isolationism of Ron Paul and paleo-cons like Pat Buchanan. But rather, a policy similar to what George W. Bush actually ran on in 2000. I suspect there are a number of younger voters out there (possibly a lot of the Ron Paul voters) that are pro- fiscal conservatism but balk at the administrations interventionist foreign policy.Posted by: Tversky at November 11, 2008 09:32 AM (ypxZL)
Don't punish him for moving in the right direction simply because he's moving.
Oh, Ill punish him. But not by complaining about his actions. Ill punish him by pointing and laughing at his useful idiots at DailyKos , Huffington Post, Democratic Underground, etc. Ill punish him by helping drive a wedge between him and his core supporters. <I'm feeling almost gleeful at the prospect>
Posted by: Tversky at November 11, 2008 09:39 AM (ypxZL)
Charles at LGF is right when he says Country First
Charles at LGF is a lefty. I wish people would stop citing him as some sort of conservative leader.
Don't punish him for moving in the right direction simply because he's moving.
Obama won power in large measure by attacking Bush policies. If he now adapts them then he deserves to be criticized for it, by both the left and the right. By the left for betrayal and by the right for dishonesty.
Posted by: flenser at November 11, 2008 09:40 AM (hxA+Y)
Likewise, but I'll be even more heartened if people on the right see it as a political opportunity rather than as a reason to like him.
Posted by: flenser at November 11, 2008 09:47 AM (hxA+Y)
Obama has said a lot of things and has shown that he is 'flexible' with words. We are not going to know what he truly intends for about 3-6 months. We will get snippets here and there and can try to fit the pieces together, but the guy will say anything, so it should be done with a healthy dose of scepticism.
Hopefully he will just turn out to be incompetent, rather than a hard-liner which his radical associations suggest.
Posted by: Travis at November 11, 2008 10:15 AM (uOj//)
Posted by: Travis at November 11, 2008 10:16 AM (uOj//)
Posted by: Arthur at November 11, 2008 11:55 AM (aJay5)
Why do you take the "voting present" to mean he lacks a spine and not that it is a way to hide how he really feels about those issues? If he had taken a stand and not voted present, that stand would come back to haunt him come the Pres. campaign. His whole carreer has been getting into the white House. I see the present votes as hiding damaging positions until its too late for anyone to do anything.
Face it, people and lots of them would have changed their votes if they knew where he stood on the 100 + issues he voted present for. Its just another way to disguise real motives and agendas
Posted by: Paranoid much? at November 11, 2008 03:10 PM (B/Y39)
Posted by: Paranoid much? at November 11, 2008 03:16 PM (B/Y39)
Posted by: BattleofthePyramids at November 11, 2008 03:47 PM (ssuTf)
"Empty suit" is the last thing this fucker is, in my opinion. I believe he's a hate-America communist to the core. Fasten your seat belts, folks, this could get very rough. Assume there will be some sort of disaster--either national security or economic or both--that will cause severed supply lines (no trucks or trains) and/or power grid down for some period of time.
Stock up a year's (or at least a few months') worth of supplies, if you can, including sterilized drinking water. Make a "72-hour kit" for every member of the family, because of possibility of evacuation/relocation. Think Y2K prep. The Mormons and the Red Cross have lots of tips and checklists on this kind of thing. Google emergency preparedness.
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 11, 2008 08:40 PM (Prdx7)
"Empty suit" is the last thing this fucker is, in my opinion. I believe he's a hate-America communist to the core. Fasten your seat belts, folks, this could get very rough. Assume there will be some sort of disaster--either national security or economic or both--that will cause severed supply lines (no trucks or trains) and/or downed power grid for some period of time.
Stock up a year's (or at least a few months') worth of supplies, if you can, including sterilized drinking water. Make a "72-hour kit" for every member of the family, because of possibility of evacuation/relocation. Think Y2K prep. The Mormons and the Red Cross have lots of tips and checklists on this kind of thing. Google emergency preparedness.
Also (Red Cross won't include this on their list!): guns and ammo. Nothing wrong with being ready to protect and defend your family. Things can get ugly in a meltdown.
And I would suggest doing your prep before the new year, which means before the distractions of the holiday season, which means now.
Posted by: Kathy from Kansas at November 11, 2008 08:45 PM (Prdx7)
Posted by: Anya at May 11, 2009 09:29 AM (Xef3x)
Posted by: Solana at June 01, 2009 01:59 AM (NNxYx)
Posted by: Maxime at July 03, 2009 04:52 PM (iGGQU)
Read this article, I<a href="http://www.flashreplica.com/" title="louis vuitton">Louis Vuitton</a> see a lot of things
By seeing this article, I <a href="http://www.flashreplica.com/" title="louis vuitton">Louis Vuitton</a>understand a lot, learned a lot of knowledge
Posted by: louis vuitton at September 16, 2009 06:03 AM (iFT09)
Professional Logo and
stationery design
Posted by: common at September 17, 2009 07:08 AM (qVZDI)
Posted by: Louis Vuitton Replica at September 18, 2009 01:55 AM (0KIjA)
Posted by: cheap nike shoes at September 26, 2009 09:13 PM (TSb5M)
Posted by: classic ugg boots at September 26, 2009 09:15 PM (TSb5M)
Posted by: nike running shoes at September 26, 2009 09:16 PM (TSb5M)
Posted by: iolanda at September 30, 2009 01:40 AM (YgE7Y)
This lv outlet is just come out this spring show, it’s a totally new style of lv outlet, worth to buy.
louis vuitton outlet
Anyone know louis vuitton outlet near by? I am looking for one but never get.
I just bought this bag from louis vuitton which located in New York city, it’s wonderful.
cheap louis vuitton are located in all major cities such as Shanghai, New York, etc, you may travel to these cities and get one for yourself.
Posted by: LV at October 05, 2009 10:58 PM (APjW2)
Posted by: heheheroling at October 26, 2009 07:37 AM (bec9Z)
Posted by: chanel glasses at November 24, 2009 08:14 PM (ea2Za)
Posted by: Wholesale NFL Jerseys at January 03, 2010 08:01 AM (NEpim)
Powered by Minx 1.1.2-pink.









