Comments on: Has Media Let Obama’s Reversal Pass Unnoticed?

By: Angie

Angie — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 15:51:41 +0000

It’s always been about him. Some people had too much glitz in their eyes to see it, though. (That’s why it’s helpful to have a jaded opinion about ALL politicians, low expectations, so if they happen to stumble into doing something good or right, there’s a surprise like used to be in the bottom of the cereal box when I was a kid.)

“WE” – Whenever I said “we” as a kid, my dad always asked me if I were speaking French or if I had a mouse in my pocket. Admittedly, I get the French-speaking part, but to this day I still don’t get the mouse part.

@Bill: You voted him in on his policies, which seem to be mutating from day to day – not MORPHING but MUTATING. Funny, I thought you elected him based on Policy A (now Policy A-128769 and nothing resembling the original “A”), Policy B (now Policy B-488722 and nothing resembling the original “B”), etc. etc. etc. Now that those policies you elected him on are no longer in existence – sometimes at complete right angles to the promises that got him elected – how can you continue to support those policies?

His flip-flopping now is NO different than the continuous flips and flops he exhibited during his campaign:
1. “Will I take public financing? Yes.” Later, after seeing the potential money machine at work, “No, we’re going to run based on contributions from ‘the little guy.’”
2. “I don’t believe my church is particularly controversial” followed days later by “Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.”
3. “I support NAFTA.” “Well, no I don’t.”
4. Just Say NO to Michigan and Florida primary elections! Well…. let’s count them after all.

The list goes on and on and on…

Change for the sake of change. Personally, I quit caring much. They’re all cut from the same cloth, have the same pattern and weave, and the only change is that we’re using the backside of the same printed bolt.

By: lou conde

lou conde — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 06:06:08 +0000

So what’s next? Bill Clinton as UN ambassador and Monica as his deputy working under him?

By: MarkJ

MarkJ — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 04:33:53 +0000

Hey Bill,

Hmmmm….Obama’s picks so far are:

1. Mostly white.
2. Mostly male.
3. Mostly “Old DC Hands.”
4. Mostly on the back side of 60

Note: Obama’s latest pick to head his economic advisory council is the “young, fresh” Paul Volcker, age 81 (Princeton, Class of 1949), who’s been bouncing in and out of Washington for longer than you’ve been alive. Heck, Volcker started working at Treasury in 1962–when JFK was still very much alive and “slipping his PT-109″ to Marilyn Monroe on a regular basis.

C’mon, let’s see you do the “Hope and Change Happy Dance” one more time!

By: David

David — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 03:25:21 +0000

Well Bill, so far we have heard a lot of talk from Obama but nothing is different from any other politician except Obama maybe the most inexperienced politition ever voted into office first his change involves most of Clintons old cronies keeping Bushes tax cuts
not even any idea about what to do with Iraq or afganistan he isn’t even sworn in office and his inexperience is showing big time …so how much time do we give him …till the walls fall all the way down?

By: bill

bill — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:54:49 +0000

Alright, this is just stupid. The country, “we”, elected Obama with a clear majority vote. Thus, we have announced that Obama’s policies are what we want. What do you expect, Obama pulling a Carter and convening a group of people at Camp David? Only on a much larger scale?
Why don’t you actually see Obama’s policies in action before you make your predictable overly-partisan attack of anything Democratic.

By: David Adams

David Adams — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:51:54 +0000

How can there be ‘vision’ without knowledge?
Obama knows nothing about everything. He has been told what to say and what to do by other minds with other agendas.
He is a figurehead who will follow orders because his only ‘job’ is to bask in his own ego.

By: BGDRAKE

BGDRAKE — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:38:47 +0000

sO WHAT DO THE PROGRESSIVE NUTBALLS WANT oBAMA TO DO-BESIDE GIVING THENATION TO THE NUTS THAT WANT CHANGE LIKE PUTIN OFFERS? LET’S HEART IT FOR OLD BLOOODY JOE AND THE GULAGS AND THE SIBERIAN LABOR CAMPS. GIVE THE YOUNG MAN A CHANCE AT HIS IDEAS SINCE YOU GAVE HIM THE ELECTION

By: Sean

Sean — Thu, 27 Nov 2008 01:34:38 +0000

America isn’t used to the use of the “royal we” as like the famous line by Queen Victoria “We(Queen Victoria) are not amused”

So what “the One” was saying is that “we” (Obama) were the change we (Obama) were waiting for.

So we can translate his words as I am the change I have been waiting for (if you translate from the royal we).

Either that or the first “we” was Obama and the second we was his koolaid squad.

You never know who Obama is referring to when he says “we” as it could be himself (the royal we).