Obama for change?

[stephanie_webster]

then why is he putting clinton people all around him? what's new and different except for the mess from Bush?

 

[sr71plt]

then why is he putting clinton people all around him? what's new and different except for the mess from Bush?

It's hardly avoidable. He's been told ad nauseum he needs people with experience in key administration spots. The last administration in which Democrats were in place to get administration experience was the Clinton administration. No mystery that some folks associated with the Clinton administration would be in the Obama administration then.

 

[stephanie_webster]

the sad part, is that there is no Tech boom that the Billie was able to coat tail and ride to fame!

then why is he putting clinton people all around him?
what's new and different except for the mess from Bush?

 

[epiphany65]

Change is about policies, not people.

 

[jeninflorida]

Well we shall see. With the world economy being in the toilet at least, well hopefully he will not be able to raise taxes. What makes me nervous is that that he says one thing to get votes and then next week does something different.

Change is about policies, not people.

 

[Liar]

then why is he putting clinton people all around him?

That's the beauty of vauge political buzzwords like "change" or for that matter "county first". It can mean anything they want at the moment, and they can go on being pragmatic and work for practical policy instead of symbolic politics.

 

[jeninflorida]

not sure how to respond, if obama fails then we will be in a worse place. my fear, between what bush has done in the past 4 weeks (with this bail out) is that we will become the United Socialist States of America

That's the beauty of vauge political buzzwords like "change" or for that matter "county first". It can mean anything they want at the moment.

 

[wildehafer]

Change is about policies, not people.

but it's people that put the policies in place.

 

[3113]

Gosh. You make it sound like he hired religious fundamentalists!

then why is he putting clinton people all around him? what's new and different except for the mess from Bush?

I'm a little mystified. Were the Clinton years bad for you? Were the fundies in power then? Abstinence over birth control taught? Freedom of choice restricted? The government allowing the environment to be destroyed willy-nilly? Was the economy in the toilet along with the U.S.' reputation? Were we borrowing money and spending it on a war we couldn't afford and torturing people? As I recall, Bill tried--and failed--to establish gays in the military. Hillary tried--and failed--to get universal health care.

Why are you so upset at the Clintons? How are they somehow opposed to the changes you want to see And do you really want Obama to fill his cabinet with inexperienced newbies who, while they may have some great ideas, will have to waste a great deal of time, maybe years, re-inventing the wheel in order to make those ideas a reality?

If I've learned anything in my life, I've learned that you want people who know how to get things done. The Clintons learned this with the media. When they came into office they didn't know how to treat reporters right (completely new and ignorant). They put a know-nothing in charge of the press and got slammed by the media until they hired a press secretary who'd been there, done that and knew what the fuck he was doing.

So, I'd say that Obama's being a lot smarter than the Clintons were when they took office.

And finally, I agree with the point that change is policies not people. If Obama says "We go this way!" and the Clinton people say, "We'll make that happen," and they go HIS way, then there will be change. What you're all fretting about is that Obama's gonna say, "Tell me what to do and how to do it!" and be a Clinton puppet. That remains to be seen. But if he wants them to jump his way, and he's willing to fire them if they don't, then all you or any of us has to worry about is what way HE want to go and if he was smart enough to pick people who can make what he wants to happen, happen.

So. Are you saying Obama's stupid and doesn't know what's he's doing? Or just that, gosh-darn, you're disappointed that he's not doing exactly what you wanted him to do? Because I hate to break this to you...he's going to disappoint you or someone else on that score. Again and again as you can't please all the people all the time. And here's another news flash: miracles won't happen. But progress MIGHT happen. You should always be willing to question, examine, criticize. But you should also consider what it is you're asking and whether you're making some weird, blanket, knee-jerk judgement call rather than an informed opinion. Why are these appointments bothering you? What do they say to you that's making you so ? And why such an extreme reaction? Is it really that bad?

 

[sr71plt]

Obama doesn't even take office for two months, during which the situation on the ground in the country undoubtedly will radically change from last summer when the parties had to set up their campaign platforms. I for one want his administration to be responding to the situation of January 2009, not of July 2008, thank you very much.

(And the change he touted was from the 8 years of the Bush administration, not necessarily from the previous Clinton administration.)

 

[JackLuis]

I still would like to see a Fresh Deck rather than a fast shuffle

 

[jeninflorida]

we were living in CA and my hubby had a great business in Tech. The clinton years were great due to RR and it drives me nuts when people are so pro clintons. If RR wouldn't have made the investments in tech and the military the clinton years would have been on par with the Carter years. What did the clintons do? oh i do give you that one, that the clintons learned a lot of the media when they were in office. they were the masters of spin! but lost it when hillary ran for Prez, lost their touch with spin control. the only thing that bill knew how to do was an intern

I think that Birth Control is up to the parent...and should be given...other wise the parents are a fool to think that kids will wait.

gay...we all bleed red and if he/she wants to be in the military good for you...who cares if he/she is gay...and i also see no reason why if one is gay should he/she not be allowed to be married.

Obama is the master of media right now. Many many DVD's did he mail out? talk about a person one on one marketing! WOW, he knows how to market himself.

I'm a little mystified. Were the Clinton years bad for you? Were the fundies in power then? Abstinence over birth control taught? Freedom of choice restricted? The government allowing the environment to be destroyed willy-nilly? Was the economy in the toilet along with the U.S.' reputation? Were we borrowing money and spending it on a war we couldn't afford and torturing people? As I recall, Bill tried--and failed--to establish gays in the military. Hillary tried--and failed--to get universal health care.

Why are you so upset at the Clintons? How are they somehow opposed to the changes you want to see And do you really want Obama to fill his cabinet with inexperienced newbies who, while they may have some great ideas, will have to waste a great deal of time, maybe years, re-inventing the wheel in order to make those ideas a reality?

If I've learned anything in my life, I've learned that you want people who know how to get things done. The Clintons learned this with the media. When they came into office they didn't know how to treat reporters right (completely new and ignorant). They put a know-nothing in charge of the press and got slammed by the media until they hired a press secretary who'd been there, done that and knew what the fuck he was doing.

So, I'd say that Obama's being a lot smarter than the Clintons were when they took office.

And finally, I agree with the point that change is policies not people. If Obama says "We go this way!" and the Clinton people say, "We'll make that happen," and they go HIS way, then there will be change. What you're all fretting about is that Obama's gonna say, "Tell me what to do and how to do it!" and be a Clinton puppet. That remains to be seen. But if he wants them to jump his way, and he's willing to fire them if they don't, then all you or any of us has to worry about is what way HE want to go and if he was smart enough to pick people who can make what he wants to happen, happen.

So. Are you saying Obama's stupid and doesn't know what's he's doing? Or just that, gosh-darn, you're disappointed that he's not doing exactly what you wanted him to do? Because I hate to break this to you...he's going to disappoint you or someone else on that score. Again and again as you can't please all the people all the time. And here's another news flash: miracles won't happen. But progress MIGHT happen. You should always be willing to question, examine, criticize. But you should also consider what it is you're asking and whether you're making some weird, blanket, knee-jerk judgement call rather than an informed opinion. Why are these appointments bothering you? What do they say to you that's making you so ? And why such an extreme reaction? Is it really that bad?

 

[sr71plt]

Well, perhaps we all could just wait until Obama is actually in office before making judgments on what has not happened. We are still stuck with Bush's deal for two more months.

 

[jeninflorida]

omg how to get past July 2008! how much has the market lost...how much more will it lose? and the big 3 do not have the support of DC, will they come Dec? Not sure, there are a few Dem's that fear nothing will change for the big 3 and the tax payer will have to bail them out again.

also, it didn't help that these (the big 3 ceo's) few in on private jets...granted if gm owns a private jet the ceo should have the right to use it but maybe they should start to reduce cost by selling the jet? how can one beg for money when he/she flies around on a private jet?

finally, the fool who runs the UAW thinks that the big three problem has nothing to do with the union....so I'm torn. 10% unemployment or make a stand against the union and a poorly run company?

Obama doesn't even take office for two months, during which the situation on the ground in the country undoubtedly will radically change from last summer when the parties had to set up their campaign platforms. I for one want his administration to be responding to the situation of January 2009, not of July 2008, thank you very much.

(And the change he touted was from the 8 years of the Bush administration, not necessarily from the previous Clinton administration.)

 

[Sandy_Fox]

I still would like to see a Fresh Deck rather than a fast shuffle

and when I go in for surgery I want to know that the doctor's have successfully performed the operation before!

 

[Misty_Morning]

Even I say give the man a chance before you start poo-pooing his selections.

I didn't vote for him, and I struggled with my decision till the last minute....

I am not about to criticize before he has been given a chance.

I think it's time to wipe the slate clean....

Let's see what the man can do.


Let's see what America can do.

 

[lil_elvis]

What's the worst that could happen?

All the Clinton holdovers sabotage Obama so that Hil can run in 2012

 

[Belegon]

May I just point out one area in which we have today seen the possibility/probability of change?

Tom Daschle for Health & Human Services.

"WHAT?" you say? "How is putting the former majority leader of the senate in your cabinet supposed to be called change?"

Easy. Tom Daschle is not a health professional, despite having written one of the better books out there on the problems of the health care system. Know what he is?

A politician. He knows Congress. Which is key, because it reveals Obama's intentions. He intends to attack Health Care in the place where he can actually accomplish something about it. In the Senate.

Daschle's role will be to get Health Care reform passed, using all the dirty little tricks he learned.

By contrast, Bill gave the job to a woman who had zero experience with lawmakers, but that he believed he could trust. Hilary tried, but failed. She was devoted to the cause, but did not have the tools.

Daschle has the tools.

 

[3113]

What's the worst that could happen?

All the Clinton holdovers sabotage Obama so that Hil can run in 2012

Funny. But unlikely.

 

[lil_elvis]

Funny. But unlikely.

I wasn't being serious, cynicism just comes naturally.

However, what I do want to know is what happened to all of those outsider names Obama dropped during the campaign. You know people who aren't professional politicians and might have actually had some experience with what works in the real world, not that fairyland otherwise known as Washington D.C., where they're all beholden to whatever interest groups are funding their campaigns.

 

[Belegon]

I wasn't being serious, cynicism just comes naturally.

However, what I do want to know is what happened to all of those outsider names Obama dropped during the campaign. You know people who aren't professional politicians and might have actually had some experience with what works in the real world, not that fairyland otherwise known as Washington D.C., where they're all beholden to whatever interest groups are funding their campaigns.

You don't seriously think Warren Buffet was gonna take that cut in pay?

Obama would love that, but it ain't gonna happen.

 

[3113]

we were living in CA and my hubby had a great business in Tech. The clinton years were great due to RR and it drives me nuts when people are so pro clintons.

Always happy to drive someone nuts who's pro-RR and full of shit. Especially if they misunderstand me.

I mean that the Clintons didn't borrow money on U.S. credit recklessly or spend it recklessly enriching their oil buddies as Bush did nor did they needless funding a war we didn't need and wouldn't do us any good, wasting more money and getting us into one hell of an economic hole like Bush did. That's what I meant. So if that didn't happen, I don't see what anyone has to complain about when it comes to Clintons and the economy they either created or maintained (pick your word).

Happy to drive you nuts any time you like: Clinton. Clinton. Clinton.

 

[sr71plt]

You don't seriously think Warren Buffet was gonna take that cut in pay?

Obama would love that, but it ain't gonna happen.

Precisely. The likes of Warren Buffet don't have to have an administration title to be an administration adviser insider. He'll just be named to major task forces here and there.

 

[sr71plt]

Always happy to drive someone nuts who's pro-RR and full of shit. Especially if they misunderstand me.

Well, if we really want to drive the mourning RR crowd batty on this point, would this be a good place to note that Al Gore, not RR, invented the Internet?

 

[Sandy_Fox]

we were living in CA and my hubby had a great business in Tech. The clinton years were great due to RR and it drives me nuts when people are so pro clintons. If RR wouldn't have made the investments in tech and the military the clinton years would have been on par with the Carter years. What did the clintons do?

Always happy to drive someone nuts who's pro-RR and full of shit. Especially if they misunderstand me.

I mean that the Clintons didn't borrow money on U.S. credit recklessly or spend it recklessly enriching their oil buddies as Bush did nor did they needless funding a war we didn't need and wouldn't do us any good, wasting more money and getting us into one hell of an economic hole like Bush did. That's what I meant. So if that didn't happen, I don't see what anyone has to complain about when it comes to Clintons and the economy they either created or maintained (pick your word).

Happy to drive you nuts any time you like: Clinton. Clinton. Clinton.

Wow, did you hear? Bill Clinton is going to run for Governor of Florida next time! How cool is that!