Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Change aint easy for Obama either (Page 1)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   
Author Topic: Change aint easy for Obama either
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I thought Obama was about change...

His cabinet so far seems vaugly familiar:

Rahm Emanuel (Chief of Staff) - Former senior advisor to Clinton
Eric Holder (Attorney General) - Former deputy attornery general under Clinton
Tom Daschle (Sec. HHS) - Former senate majority leader
Hillary Clinton (potential Sec State)
Greg Craig (WH Counsel) - Former counsel to Clinton and all around creep.

Hope and Change!

Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Everard
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
As I said somewhere else, the change thing is irrelevent until he does something. His cabinet won't show us how he's governing, only how he governs will show us that.

I'm a bit disappointed he's not bringing in new people. On the other hand, the leaders of the departments probably should be people that the rest of the government can work with. *shrug*

We'll see what he does. Who he appoints to advise him on what to do is... boring.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It is boring, but also, I think, telling. For all the retoric about change, you would think that he would at least appear to bring in outsiders...

You are right though that we need to wait for some actions. Until then, this is all we have to go on...

Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I find it interesting that Obama was criticized for not having experience, and now he's being criticized for bringing people in who have experience.

Color me cynical, but I'm pretty sure that if Obama had brought in a team of "outsiders" he would have been criticized for bringing in people without enough experience.

Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
He was critized for having no experience because that is all McCain had to go on. His followers drooled over the "Hope and Change" message. He would have been critized by the same people who didn't beat him in the election - not the ones who voted for him.

I think most people assumed that he would bring in outsiders since that is what he implied with his message. Maybe I am not cynical, but I doubt the criticism would have been too loud...

Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Some alleged insiders have said Obama thinks the Clintons got in trouble early by trying to make big changes too soon. If he does think that, it would make sense to appoint known figures with a lot of experience. And if his foreign trip was a preview, he kept his ears open and his mouth shut, and made a good impression by doing very little. Similarly he has to know a lot of Americans are frightened by his ascension to power, so keeping things placid for a year after the election would do a lot to defuse that. Of course he will be forced to address emergencies, but putting off anything he can would be a net gain. But he has not asked me to advise him on anything, so for my part he can do what seems best to him. That is a consequence of winning the election.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
His followers drooled over the "Hope and Change" message.
I was under the impression that McCain won the senior citizen and special needs vote.
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
munga
Member
Member # 6006

 - posted      Profile for munga   Email munga   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by hobsen:
Some alleged insiders have said Obama thinks the Clintons got in trouble early by trying to make big changes too soon. If he does think that, it would make sense to appoint known figures with a lot of experience. And if his foreign trip was a preview, he kept his ears open and his mouth shut, and made a good impression by doing very little. Similarly he has to know a lot of Americans are frightened by his ascension to power, so keeping things placid for a year after the election would do a lot to defuse that. Of course he will be forced to address emergencies, but putting off anything he can would be a net gain. But he has not asked me to advise him on anything, so for my part he can do what seems best to him. That is a consequence of winning the election.

Hobsen, I agree with you. And yet, I think the solutions to several problems are quite powerful and good, but will also be fought by fiscal conservatives who don't understand how economy works. The capital crisis is a capital crisis. When Obama says, "let's solve this by releasing capital sufficient for the existing production, at the societal strata just beneath the producers, where will do what what is needed," the republicans are going to scream "devalution" and "socialism!!!" although the idea, injection of capital on the indication of inflation for production, is purely capitalist. It's just that we're wildly mis-educated.

What I'm saying is, the economy is an ailing patient and the corrective surgery cannot be delayed, but when Obama says, "let's go ahead and give the patient a bone marrow transplant" the conservatives are going to scream, "BUT ITS THE LIVER AND IF YOU DO THE TRANSPLANT WE ARE ALL GOONNNNA DIE!!!"

I'm just hoping they can all hold their dinners down and get it done, in spite of the conniption-fits by the less-educated.

[ November 19, 2008, 04:00 PM: Message edited by: munga ]

Posts: 5515 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
The Drake
Member
Member # 2128

 - posted      Profile for The Drake   Email The Drake   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
So he's bringing in former Clinton aides? Seems to me that would be a lot of change back in the right direction.

Maybe this AG won't be in favor of torturing people.

Maybe this White House Counsel won't argue that the VP is above the law as a fourth branch of government.

Maybe this secretary of state won't advocate invading other countries at the UN.

"Change" doesn't mean nothing we've ever seen before, it just means "not like the present"

Posts: 7707 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Haggis:
I find it interesting that Obama was criticized for not having experience, and now he's being criticized for bringing people in who have experience.

That's the spin. It works if you believe *only* former Clinton administration officials have the necessary experience. The problem for The Great Leader will be, as Jules Crittenden points out:
quote:
This is going to be fun over the next four years, when the going gets ugly and Obama is in the middle of a pack of Clintonistas, trying to figure out who’s working for who.
Just where will their loyalties lie? It's a reasonable question. If you have to wonder, maybe they aren't that good a choice. I'd never underestimate the Clintons ...
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
I'd never underestimate the Clintons ...
But you are willing to underestimate Obama, who already beat the Clintons. Remember a year ago, everybody was saying that Hillary had the nomination in the bag.
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
G2
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Haggis:
quote:
I'd never underestimate the Clintons ...
But you are willing to underestimate Obama, who already beat the Clintons. Remember a year ago, everybody was saying that Hillary had the nomination in the bag.
Obama has no record, no experience, we can't make any estimates on him. I've seen the Clinton's in action though and I wouldn't want to be surrounded by them and their team if there was a chance my failure could benefit them.
IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Yeah, cause you want people with NO administrative experience for an administration facing the most challenges in three generations at least. That way you're sure to get effective change... You people speak with the political understanding of children sometimes.

One of Clinton's biggest mistakes, which screwed his first two years and helped bring about the 94 Repub ascendancy, was overdoing the "no people from the failed Carter admin". That's how they got a CoS not ready for the big leagues, a SecTreas. who was ready only for the old folks home, and others.

18 million Democratic voters wanted Hillary to be president. Should they be shut out entirely? Should we treat you people with the same vindictive ideological purity? Or should we do the bipartisan thing appoint a repub or two to the cabinet? You can't have it both ways, and you definitely can't expect us to be bipartisan with you and dickish to our own comrades.

In other words, quitcher hyperbole already. Why don't you wait till you see actual policy before you scream that if someone had anything to do with government prior to, well, Jan 20th 2009, that means the betrayal of everything?

This is democratic reform, people. Not bloody revolution.

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
munga said:
quote:
I'm just hoping they can all hold their dinners down and get it done, in spite of the conniption-fits by the less-educated.
Did you just call me less-educated?
Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
munga
Member
Member # 6006

 - posted      Profile for munga   Email munga   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
not I!
Posts: 5515 | Registered: Jan 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Funean
Member
Member # 2345

 - posted      Profile for Funean   Email Funean   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
<first Marge Simpson noise at pending administration>
Posts: 5277 | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
FiredrakeRAGE
Member
Member # 1224

 - posted      Profile for FiredrakeRAGE   Email FiredrakeRAGE   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Munga,

I know you're joking around, but calling the other team 'less educated' is not likely to start great dialog [Smile]

Posts: 3538 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cb
Member
Member # 6179

 - posted      Profile for cb   Email cb       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lobo:
I thought Obama was about change...

His cabinet so far seems vaugly familiar:

Rahm Emanuel (Chief of Staff) - Former senior advisor to Clinton
Eric Holder (Attorney General) - Former deputy attornery general under Clinton
Tom Daschle (Sec. HHS) - Former senate majority leader
Hillary Clinton (potential Sec State)
Greg Craig (WH Counsel) - Former counsel to Clinton and all around creep.

Hope and Change!

Interesting. But, the real story here is that this man who attracted 67 million votes because of his charisma and charm has only has-beens from a previous admin to appoint to these top positions. Why?

Doesn't he have anyone he has come to trust over the the course of his politcal career? Why is he not bringing in his own people who helped him get elected? Why isn't he appointing young people, women and people of ethnic diversity in large numbers. That would be the perfect combination of cabinet leaders to bring about the change everyone got all glissy-eyed about during the campaign? I can understand some of these posts being filled by people with experience, but 31 out 47 positions are given to Clintonians? Something not right about that.

Maybe, just maybe it's because these people are not necessarily "Clinton people". Maybe these people are the pets of the power brokers of Washington DC who put Obama where he is in the first place. Maybe Obama is being told who he will put where. Maybe everything we see come from this presidency is not really coming from this presidency. Just a thought.

Posts: 347 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Greg Davidson
Member
Member # 3377

 - posted      Profile for Greg Davidson   Email Greg Davidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That must be exactly it. And if that were true, then we will see not change at all from the status quo that has ruled inside the Beltway for decades.

Let's have a chat on November 19, 2009, and see how true that prediction is.

Posts: 4178 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Stevarooni
Member
Member # 6053

 - posted      Profile for Stevarooni   Email Stevarooni   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Meh. The nervous trepidation over every (leaked) rumor and (wild) speculation of Mr. Obama's cabinet are annoying. Assuming that he intends change, this can be accomplished with former members of previous administrations, too; if they're not enacting the changes he wants, they're fired. Or, it might be the same as it ever was. A list of names and their ties to the (Bill) Clinton Administration doesn't say much, really. [Razz]
Posts: 536 | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TommySama
Member
Member # 2780

 - posted      Profile for TommySama   Email TommySama       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Obama is just trying to get people who will know what to do from the get go.

"I was under the impression that McCain won the senior citizen and special needs vote. "

lol

Posts: 6396 | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Pete at Home
Member
Member # 429

 - posted      Profile for Pete at Home   Email Pete at Home   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Haggis:
quote:
His followers drooled over the "Hope and Change" message.
I was under the impression that McCain won the senior citizen and special needs vote.
That's ironic, since those two groups are probably the ones most in need of frequent changing.
Posts: 44193 | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lyrhawn
Member
Member # 3319

 - posted      Profile for Lyrhawn   Email Lyrhawn   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Doesn't he have anyone he has come to trust over the the course of his politcal career? Why is he not bringing in his own people who helped him get elected? Why isn't he appointing young people, women and people of ethnic diversity in large numbers. That would be the perfect combination of cabinet leaders to bring about the change everyone got all glissy-eyed about during the campaign? I can understand some of these posts being filled by people with experience, but 31 out 47 positions are given to Clintonians? Something not right about that.
Yes. He is. He is.

From the looks of things, a woman HS Secretary, a woman at SecState, the first black AG, and a slew of personal advisors that were either in his campaign or he's known for a long time.

I don't see what all the fuss is about.

Posts: 729 | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"Doesn't he have anyone he has come to trust over the the course of his politcal career?"

Because running a campaign or being chief strategist don't necessarily qualify you for other areas of expertise? Because he's gonna need them for positions like top political adviser, communications director (i.e. Josh Lyman and Toby Ziegler types, as opposed to the guys who are NOT in the president's immediate circle, like the vast majority of cabinet appointees ever.)

I was somewhat surprised that he didn't give CoS to one David or the other, but one can hardly say Rahm Emanuel is not someone who helped Obama grow along the way and hasn't been allied with him for a good long while.

Come on, let's hear it: Whom should Obama appoint to any of the positions where any serious names have been named, how do those people represent more change and why do the specific individuals who have been named not do so? I mean, beyond "having served in government before".

Show me who appointed absolute neophytes to cabinet positions. People with no senior experience anywhere in government. Please, I'm all ears.

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The fuss is about trying to set a meme that he's disappointed before he's even been sworn in. It's partisan trolling, basically, since they won't offer names or explain why people like Holder don't represent change in policy.

As for the counsel, Craig? You gotta be kidding. You thought change was coming from the personal lawyer position? Whom should he appoint, someone who *doesn't* have experience at this most unique job?

It saddens me that this is the level of political discourse here. Well, the real conservatives with actual political brains are still sulking, mostly, and allowing themselves to be drawn into this childishness. They'll come around soon. [Razz]

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Special needs? If he did, that's solely due to Trig. Obama had a separate platform section on Americans with disabilties. McCain's actual platform barely addressed the issue.
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Special needs? If he did, that's solely due to Trig. Obama had a separate platform section on Americans with disabilties. McCain's actual platform barely addressed the issue.
'twas but an ironic joke, as Pete pointed out. I don't know who won that vote, but I do know who pandered to it.
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
cb
Member
Member # 6179

 - posted      Profile for cb   Email cb       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, since you asked...lets make a list of those to whom Obama has shown allegiance and to whom he owes political debt:

[*] Todd Stroger, son of John Stroger Chicago. Political Machine boss who, though now dead, was nearly ousted from office (many feel he would have been ousted had Obama endorsed the progressive opponent who came within 7 points of winning…Obama refused). Todd Stroger is following in his father’s foot steps, using nefarious means to obtain his father’s positon. Obama “endorsed the young heir to the machine, calling him -- to the absolute horror of Chicago liberals -- a "good, progressive Democrat." (http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB121918996082755013.html)

[*]Dorothy Tillman, a hard nosed, Chicago Alderman who was “involved in the Harold Washington Cultural Center (HWCC) since its inception. An award winning 2006 three-part investigative report by the Chicago local paper Lakefront Outlook claimed accounting irregularities and conflicts of interest by Tillman and her family.[2][3][4] Despite the controversy and his stand on ethics reform, U.S. Senator Barack Obama endorsed Tillman in her 2007 election noting she was an early supporter of his.” (Wikipedia.) Let’s make her Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

[*]Mayor Richard Daly whom Obama endorsed in 2007 for re-election. Obama claimed that Daly had cleaned up city hall. A bit disingenuous since Daly was at the center of a ballooning federal inquiry into the administration’s hiring practices. Mr. Daley has not been accused of any crime, but some of his top aides have been indicted. Let’s make him the Secretary of Housing and Urbane development.

[*]Emil Jones Illinois Senate Leader who took Obama under his wing. The first 6 years of his tenure Obama passed not one bill. In the last year before running for US Senator Jones had Obama sign on as sponsor of virtually every high-profile piece of legislation they’d been working on, angering many rank-and-file state legislators who had more seniority than Obama and had spent years championing the bills. He should be Secretary of Defense.

[*]If he wanted to make amends he could appoint Alice Palmer, and his other three opponents in the run for the open Illinois Senate seat. “Though the candidates had double the number of required signatures, Obama's operatives got enough signatures disqualified to have all his opponents, including Obama's mentor Alice Palmer, thrown out of the race. Obama was not going to let honor, democracy or an African-American friend and mentor stand in the way of what he wanted.” http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/23/224059/069 Whatever’s left over, just give it to them…they deserve a break..


Considering Obama’s historical political variances, I guess we should count ourselves lucky he’s not drawing from his past connections to fill his cabinet. [Smile]

Posts: 347 | Registered: Aug 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Drake:
So he's bringing in former Clinton aides? Seems to me that would be a lot of change back in the right direction.

Maybe this AG won't be in favor of torturing people.

Maybe this White House Counsel won't argue that the VP is above the law as a fourth branch of government.

Maybe this secretary of state won't advocate invading other countries at the UN.

"Change" doesn't mean nothing we've ever seen before, it just means "not like the present"

Maybe we'll get ClintonCare 1.0 again.

Maybe we'll get Biden discussing "No controlling legal authority".

Maybe we'll get many many spurious claims of privilege well outside it's supposed bounds on personal matters.

Maybe we'll have records "disappear" for two years while under subpeona, only to be discovered on a table.

Perhaps we'll get lots of untraceable "gift card" money. Oh wait...

Perhaps we'll get another Waco.

Perhaps we'll get another Chinagate.

Maybe we'll get the blatant abuses of power, political backstabbing, and outright deceit which these worthies brought with them initially.

But then again, maybe we'll get another Republican Revolution. [Razz]

You have your narrative from that era, I have mine.

[ November 20, 2008, 09:30 PM: Message edited by: flydye45 ]

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hillary as SecState. Hillary as FRIGGIN Secretary of State. Hillary, bringing us the wonder of the Clinton years back to foreign affairs. The Cole. Embassy bombings. Somolia. Kososvo.

Isn't that exactly what we needed? Another Clinton in an executive office position. Maybe she can use her awesomeness to give us the Foreign Policy equivilent of HillaryCare. She is SO MUCH better then Cheney in listening to outside voices. I recall it clearly. Openess and transparency. "Let a hundred flowers bloom." (That is the sound of the Left losing a bashing point)

Obama was never going to win too many points from me anyway. This is a given. Picking Herself as SecState? Only selecting her as VP could have alienated me more, or the folks he is supposed to be uniting with and reaching out with brotherly hand.

"Spoils" isn't change. Hillary is not indicative of governing in a new way. I suddenly think the Lincoln comparisions are apt. Obama is going to bring the same sense of unity and calm that Lincoln brought when he first ascended to office.

ARRRGGH!

If you need me, I'll be draped on the floor with a bottle of scotch. It's the twin of the empty, cause this is a two bottle night.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Again: So we need to show bipartisanship towards you guys, but none towards half our own party? I'm not thrilled with the idea either, mind. But he has to look like he's making an effort to make her a part of it, because he needs her troops to make it work. If he decides he can trust her to follow his lead, I'ma give him benefit of the doubt. Personally, I want Holbrooke or Galbraith.
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Good luck with that. I imagine you are feeling particularly warm and fuzzy with this increasingly hawkish cabinet.

I'm waiting for the first step of bipartisanship, and by that I don't mean the wind up before another kick in the groin. She qualifies.

Just bear in mind that pretty speeches aren't enough.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
If Clinton's in and no republican, you've got a legitimate gripe. I don't particularly *like* Hillary for any cabinet post, but you don't get to completely ignore the second biggest power base in your own party. I hope this falls through and she gets to the bench instead. That I wouldn't mind ramming down y'alls throats, since you'll oppose any justice I favor anyway.
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
No, doing everything you can to piss off the oposition, and then give a post to a RINO nonentity is a legititmate gripe.

How much cred did you give Bush for selecting a Democrat again?

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
No, doing everything you can to piss off the oposition, and then give a post to a RINO nonentity is a legititmate gripe.

Well I guess you're going to have to get used to being disappointed for four years.
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ah, so you are admitting that Obama is full of it when he speaks about bipartisanship.

Not that this is a surprise to me.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Haggis
Member
Member # 2114

 - posted      Profile for Haggis   Email Haggis   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'll stand by my statement, and let people take from it what they will. You're free to interpret it as you wish.
Posts: 1771 | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Mineta is and always was a nonentity. Is Hagel, or Lugar?
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
flydye45
unregistered


 - posted            Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Depends which side of the aisle you are on. Hagel is second only to McCain for badmouthing his party. He also announced his intention to be available for the Democrats as a VP pick. HE called the surge the biggest blunder ever, which, if picked, puts his judgement on pare with Obama's. That's enough about him.

Lugar? It's nice Obama wants to try to game a Senate seat on the cheap. Reid and Durbin like him, which says loads. He's like Lieberman but without the spine. He's a nonentity. Like warm milk.

IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Storm Saxon
Member
Member # 1070

 - posted      Profile for Storm Saxon     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/opinion/21brooks.html

A little positive spin on it.

Posts: 2936 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1