We Have To Give Barack Obama A Chance
Author | joe | Posted on | December 2, 2008 | 78 Comments
Another quick-hit potential conversation starter:
If President Obama overreaches, we should pummel him for it and march on Washington if necessary. But he is our QB now, so as Americans we must allow him to begin his presidency with assurance that we have his back.
Prior to the 2008 elections, progressives projected onto Barack Obama their hopes and we conservatives projected our fears. From his initial steps as President-elect, it appears we have all had our expectations dashed.
Having your fears dashed, it turns out, is a pretty cool thing (with hopes, however … it’s not so great.) I said a couple times I would love to be proven wrong about my assumptions that Obama’s past statements and affiliations portended dark days for America’s future. It is looking like I was wrong.
AND I, FOR ONE, AM GLAD ABOUT IT.
I think there is a real danger and missed opportunity for conservatives if we go into the 2009 federal government period poised to reflexively trash the Barack Obama presidency. He seems to have a strong pragmatic streak. Not saying he doesn’t have some important issues to work out, but I plan to give him the benefit of the doubt for a long while.
Comments
78 Responses to “We Have To Give Barack Obama A Chance”
Leave a Reply
Recent Musings
- jacob: ACT, Using a politician’s front lawn as a canine comfort station is PERFECT! This is exactly the kind of...
- jacob: Kevin, So two ’stupids’ make a smart, or is it two ‘over-the-tops’ makes a reasoned?...
- Kevin: o my goodness, you are so crazy
- Brian Withnell: I’m not so sure I’d give him as much credit squiddy. The fuller context is an address to...
- ACTivist: “I thought my tone was rather tepid in comparison?” Tepid is for bath water and some beers.
- ACTivist: Looks like Rust is up to his normal “piss on you” routine. Greason following suit is no...
- Kevin: jacob, “Either this guys is pure stupid, is dangerous beyond belief, or just doesn’t read what his...
- Joe Budzinski: “Case of schnapps, and my laptop.” Yes, that’s life in the big city.
- Joe Budzinski: HA!
- Had Enough: There’s a ticket waiting for you at the airport.
Firearms Training
Blogroll
- Ace of Spades HQ
- American Daughter
- Black Velvet Bruce Li
- BlogNetNews
- BlueRidgeForum
- Bulletproof Monk
- Digital Camel
- Donny Ferguson Online
- Equality Loudoun
- Florida Cracker
- HoodaThunk?
- Hot Air
- Jihad Watch
- Just Like The Nut
- MonkeyWatch
- Not Larry Sabato
- Old NVTH Blog
- Spank That Donkey
- Straight White Guy
- The Oath
- The Other McCain
- Too Conservative
- Two Conservatives
- United Conservatives of Virginia
- VB Dems
- Virginia political blogs
- Virginia Virtucon
- Vivian Paige
Global Warming scam
- An Honest Climate Debate
- Canada Free Press
- Climate Audit
- Climate Change Science
- Climate Research News
- Climate Resistance
- Climate Science
- Climate Skeptic
- CO2 Science
- Daily Tech
- Dr Benny Peiser
- Falsehoods in Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth
- Fight Global Warming Lies
- Global Climate Scam
- Global Warming Hoax
- Heartland Institute
- Inhofe Press Blog
- Junk Science
- Science & Public Policy Institute
- Skeptics Global Warming
Topics
Tags
Resources
ODBA, etc
Find stuff here
Message to Democrats
Good Guy Award
NICE WORK, AMERICA
U.S. Apology Tour 2008-12
Fight Mass Hysteria
FROM INSANITY!
Quote of the New Year
Ecosystem
December 2nd, 2008 @ 8:37 am
unlike the dolts on the left regarding Bush I have adopted a wait and see attitude regarding Obama. that is the fair thing to do. I will always remember the lefts behavior in 2001 and 2005, and I will use that as a template for how NOT to behave.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 10:03 am
I love how you guys try to rewrite history. When Clinton came into office you guys hounded him from day one and didn’t let up until his last day in office. Bush, you might recall, came into office after receiving fewer popular votes and according to recounts that were conducted after the Supreme Court’s conservative members awarded Bush the election, fewer electoral votes as well. But after 9/11 Bush had a 90% approval rating and bipartisan support. Then Bush and Karl Rove decided to exploit 9/11 for political purposes in the 2002 elections and ran the 2004 campaign based on a strategy of divide and conquer. Obama said throughout the campaign that he wanted to move beyond that kind of politics but you still threw all the dirt at him you could come up with, which in the end just made you guys look stupid. So now that your tactics have failed and he’s won and so far is doing exactly what he said he would do, now you claim you are so virtuous compared with the evil left? Your self-delusion apparently knows no bounds.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 10:11 am
Trust but verify.
I unlike Mona Charen and David Brooks refuse to become a giddy conservative. In the case of David Brooks just giddy.
When Obama gets it right he deserves honest praise.When he gets it wrong he needs to be taken to task.
The Gates selection was as good as we could have ever expected. This is a Bush I, Brent Scrowcroft selection. Neither were conservative friendly in the long run. Bush II was not much better. A middle of the road policy wonk is better than a lefty, so again this is as good as we could have expected. Those briefings received after the election had a lot to do with this selection.It is called reality.
Gen Jones is a good man, However one has to ask why was he opposed to the Surge ? The surge worked. Now that model or something similar may be used in Afganistan. What is his position ?
Will this president gut military spending opting instead for a massive Peace Corp approach to foreign policy ? This is a legitimate question with long reaching consequences. Who wins the influence game at Foggy Bottom ? Obama or Clinton. I never thought
I would be cheering for a Clinton. I still believe Obama to be naive. This has not changed due to an electoral win.
The selection of Robert Rubin is not good. Rubin is an advocate of a Citi Corp bailout after being at the helm as that company was run into a ditch. If anyone thinks these continued bailouts are good for the country or the future of capitalism you would be wrong. Bush let the horse out of the barn and Obama is poised to inject that beast with Steroids. If taking Bush to task for making foolish decisions regarding the economy Obama should not get a pass for doing the exact same thing.
Shiny and new is not a shield. Obama will have his own Teflon suit tailored by Democrats on the hill and their own lackeys in the media.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 10:16 am
Zimzo is lying through his teeth again. No recount ever done ever showed that Bush lost Florida in 2000.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 11:03 am
Wrong as usual:
http://www.nytimes.com/images/2001/11/12/politics/recount/results/preset-v4.html
December 2nd, 2008 @ 11:31 am
I’d love to see what those “standards” are. If they differ by county (as seems to be the case) then they are not standards.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 11:33 am
“If a statewide recount”
jack, As is the norm, you are correct. It would appear again, that zimzo either did not read or comprehend the link he posted.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 11:40 am
Just have to wait and see if Obama does take office, so far he’s ignored all court cases and requests for documentation on his citizenship.
Will he ignore the Supreme Court?
Donofrio v. Wells, Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz: Major Updates on Conference, Cort’s Renewed Application
December 1st, 2008 at 7:49 pm
Leo Donofrio, Plaintiff in Donofrio v. Wells, has been able to confirm that his case was referred to the full Court by Associate Justice Clarence Thomas. This means that, per the docket, all 9 Justices have agreed to hold a Conference this Friday, December 5 to consider granting Certiorari. If this is granted, then the “Rule of Four” concept will then be in play.
If 4 of the 9 Justices respond in the affirmative to Leo’s case, there will be an oral argument and further briefing. If 5 of the 9 Justices respond in the affirmative, they could grant a stay of the Electoral College vote.
Leo also updated everyone on Cort Wrotnowski’s case (where Cort is Plaintiff), Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz. Apparently, after Cort called the Supreme Court requesting an update of his emergency stay renewal, he spoke with a certain individual who allegedly stated that his particular case (docket) had been referred to an anthrax containment facility! This news has led Leo Donofrio to call all concerned citizens to write the Supreme Court in diplomatic fashion to address this outrageous behavior.
There is also a rumor that the full Court may be seriously considering staying the Electoral College vote until after Barack Obama’s eligibility can be confirmed (the following excerpt from Bob Vernon of Honest American News (Plains Radio Network)):
Today I spoke with Patricia McCabe Estrada, Deputy Director of Public Information at the United States Supreme Court. She informed me that Mr. Donofrio’s application was first referred to the full Court by Justice Clarence Thomas on November 19, 2008. After that referral took place the full Court, and not Justice Thomas alone, distributed the application for an emergency stay for Conference of December 5, 2008. [emphasis mine]
We now know that the renewed request to halt the election was not denied and is actively being considered at the Supreme Court.
Update: Dr. Orly Taitz’s commentary. Also, CountUsOut is showing a rallying cry to protest in front of SCOTUS, Friday, December 5, 8am ET until whenever.
The following is the full text of Leo’s blog entry…
http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=1317
December 2nd, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
Marjorie, There has been a deliberate effort by Obama, et al, to conceal any and all records pertaining to his life.
I think it is suspect that he would rather pay an estimated $800,000.+ for lawyers to fight these cases and keep him from supplying the documents than the $12.00 fee for the signature birth document and comply with a simple request.
No one who has ever been involved in his life is saying anything at all, nothing. On the other hand, he may have been a loner which is more disturbing.
However, this man has managed to conceal and seal every document related to his life which made me more suspicious.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 12:20 pm
zimzo,
your memory is failing you, Clinton came into office with 42% of the vote, and said hehe had a mandate. 43% was not a mandate. His hubris and his shooting mouth off is what got him into trouble. I was more than ready to give him a chance. He blew it.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 12:31 pm
When did Clinton say he had a mandate, Jacob? That never happened.
dans, a recount was conducted by newspapers and under various scenarios Gore would have won and under some limited scenarios (such as only recounting votes in counties Gore wanted to recount, ironically) Bush would have won. But under the recount that was conducted by newspapers if all the votes cast had been accepted or rejected statewide under the legal standards of each county, Gore would have won. There was no official recount because the Supreme Court stopped that.
Jack said, “No recount ever done ever showed that Bush lost Florida in 2000.” He was wrong. Again.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 12:34 pm
And Jack as far as “standards” go, the way elections are currently set up in this country every locality has different standards. There is no one federal standard. If you think that should be changed, I would agree with you.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 12:54 pm
Stone, “Bush II was not much better” is really at the heart of the matter. We are not choosing a successor to Ronald Reagan – he who, you may remember, did not actually keep government from growing and who did leave office with a substantial budget deficit – and our choice was not between Barack Obama and Alan Keyes.
I have about as much confidence in Obama to do the right thing on quite a number of issues as I would have had in McCain. I would have been more comfortable with Hillary as the Democrat nominee largely because of issues related to foreign affairs – and now she is Secretary of State. For a bona fide liberal democrat, Obama seems reasonable.
When it comes to the economy, let’s keep in mind who he is replacing, and the fact he says he will maintain the Bush tax cuts. I’m not saying that is the cure for our ills, just another observation on Obama’s pragmatic side. All of us who thought the United States was going to come to an end because of this guy in office were apparently wrong. From what I have seen so far, I don’t think we have any more to fear from him than we had to fear from GW Bush.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 1:48 pm
Enough with the sarcasm, Joe.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 2:03 pm
Not sarcasm, I got bored with that
December 2nd, 2008 @ 2:03 pm
Joe, Did Obama change his mind about the Bush Tax Cuts? Last I heard he was voting against extending them. He was opposed to continuing them in any form.
I just figured that he would let Bushes expire, let Congress raise taxes significantly and then give us his promised tax cuts.
He is still the president designate. The electoral college has not finalized the election to president elect.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 2:08 pm
Hate to disagree Joe, but just because Obama didn’t appoint William Ayers as Secretary of State doesn’t prove anything. Much is yet to be seen, he has not even taken the oath yet and there are many questions surrounding the direction he is headed domestically and in national defense. A few appointments mean very little, I’ll wait to see what kinds of decisions he makes.
Eric Holder could have a devistating effect on our intelligence – at a time of war no less – and I agree that Robert Rubin is scary. Hillary at least has a pair, I don’t know if I can say the same about Obama, so thankfully she is up for SOS and not visa versa.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 2:09 pm
Gave myself away again with the prefill name – SANTA is Cathymac – DAMN!
Lastly, who said the Bush tax cuts would not be allowed to expire – that fight is next year for the 2010 budget.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 2:18 pm
The Constitution clearly says that the electors of each State shall be appointed “in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct….”
We do not vote for the President, but for the electors. As far as the Constitution is concerned, we do not even have the right to elect the electors.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 2:32 pm
H.E., yes Obama has hinted he would let the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010 instead of repealing them immediately. The point here is Obama is showing that he is taking a pragmatic approach and everything he’s said in the past is not necessarily going to be reflected in his policies as president.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 2:34 pm
So, Joe, you actually do believe that I was right about Obama, that he is not the dangerous radical you depicted him as during the election and that you were wrong? Wow, I’m impressed.
And while we’re all agreeing: Jack, I agree with you. The Constitution sucks.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 2:35 pm
Cathy, you have to use two browsers. Use Firefox when you are speaking as yourself, and then use Internet Explorer when you are sock puppeting. That way you’ll never get them mixed up. When you create multiple sock puppets it can be tricky, and then you can only be careful and count to ten before hitting “Submit Comment.”
It takes some practice and care, but it can be done even though occasionally you will have one puppet sounding like the other, as you can see when I sometimes get Stay Puft and Zimzo mixed up.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 2:37 pm
Yes, I have said and will say again, I am glad to be wrong about Obama. He definitely does not seem to be a dangerous radical at all. He appears to be a pragmatic Democrat.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 3:08 pm
AND YOU ALL SEE WHAT HE WANTS YOU TO SEE
December 2nd, 2008 @ 3:14 pm
Marj – Correct. Pragmatic Obama? That is yet to be determined, but don’t be naive.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 3:24 pm
I’m sure you think the Constitution sucks, zimzo, but I do not. (The 16th and 17th Amendments DO suck, however.) In fact, we have seen quite clearly how popular elections for President (or, rather, for the electors) can lead to divisiveness. I suggest we simply have the state legislatures appoint the electors (and the Senators, too).
December 2nd, 2008 @ 3:25 pm
THE ONLY NAIVE PEOPLE ARE THE ONES WHO FOLLOW OBAMA LIKE SHEEP.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 3:47 pm
Marjorie, after all that work we did on using combinations of the small and big letters … I think we are taking a step backward today.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 4:15 pm
I don’t think it’s “naive” to say the guy does not look nearly as bad as we thought.
Might I remind everyone to look who is in the White House right now – who many of us agree has done a lot of good things – and look at our budget deficit (and what it will be next year and the year after). “Big government conservatism” has been a disaster that will haunt us unless we do something like agree as a people to give 75% of our paychecks to Uncle Sam for a few years.
The creeping socialism that so many seem to be alluding to lately is as much a result of the Bush administration’s spending on new things like the prescription drug benefit and failure to rein in expenses as it is the fault of the Democrats in Congress.
So no one is perfect. The best we get to hope for is a smidgen of competence, especially with regard to making the kinds of changes that will be necessary to get the country out of debt and prepared for the baby boom social security/medicare tsunami which is going to make the current bailouts look like a rounding error. I don’t think it makes any sense to assume that a President Obama in four years won’t figure out a way to make some kind of positive progress.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 4:36 pm
zimzo,
“When did Clinton say he had a mandate, Jacob? That never happened.”
I watched him say it on the evening news dude. here is an article form the nation (a water carrier for the Dems of there ever was one …)
See more articles from The Nation
The mandate. (1992 election) (Editorial)
Article from:
The Nation
Article date:
November 23, 1992
Author:
Borosage, Robert L.
More results for:
Clinton mandate 1992 | Copyright informationCOPYRIGHT 1992 The Nation Company L.P. This material is published under license from the publisher through the Gale Group, Farmington Hills, Michigan. All inquiries regarding rights should be directed to the Gale Group. (Hide copyright information)
The election of 1992 saw a victory for Bill Clinton but, just as significantly, a loss for George Bush. Receiving less than 40% of the vote, Bush was sharply dismissed from office. Clinton now has an economic and social mandate which he must attempt to fulfill.
Victory. Admit it: It feels good. Bush, Quayle, Reaganomics, the Bible thumpers, woman haters, gay bashers, race baiters–all, in our lame duck President’s words, are history, for now.
With victory secure, the struggle begins. But first, what do the results mean? Senate minority leader Bob Dole didn’t wait for the polls to close before announcing that Clinton “has no mandate” because he got only 43 percent of the vote. …
December 2nd, 2008 @ 4:37 pm
zimzo,
another link to ano0ther article …
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1992/11/30/77200/index.htm
wrong again boy.
try
http://www.cosmos-club.org/web/journals/1995/ccamp.html
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:13 pm
Joe,
#28…Got me on that
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:17 pm
jacob and Joe,
I don’t believe that you two are being sarcastic. I believe that you are finally understanding that you just feared the word fear. Pres. Obama is the best thing to happen to this country in a very long time and his daily commitment to the people of the United States, as far as his picks and actions are concerned, should be eliminating all your fears. I believe that Cathymac, Marjorie, Jack and others just refuse to see truth and are nothing more than haters. I won’t say racists at this point but it sure feels that way. Hopefully you will be able to convince these other people that everything will be just fine.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:18 pm
Joe, I agree with you on this. As the voters have spoken, time to give the guy a chance. Anything less, imho, is sour grapes..
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:19 pm
Joe,
Before you go slamming Bush about the current issues about money, home mortgages etc.
Lets look at the dem’s in office who continue to slam Bush for the mess they made….Pelosi. Reid, Franks etc…
After all, they all said everything was just fine before the bottom fell out. They have yet to admit responseability for any of it.
The sad fact remains is they won’t, they do not know how to admit mistakes.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:21 pm
zimzo,
I can agree with you most all the time on the many issues that you have taken these people to task on. I have to disagree with you on the point that the Constitution sucks. I admit that there are some changes that need to be made in the way of guns in private citizens hands, the meanness towards immigrants and the rabid hatred coming from conservative talk shows but the Constitution is our laws and Pres. Obama, with the help from Congress, will change things and make them righteous. Did you really mean to say that the Constitution sucks?
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:28 pm
Jacob, you did not hear Clinton saying he had a mandate on the evening news because he never said it. None of the articles you cite show that he said it. I do hope you will not act toward Obama as you guys acted toward Clinton (no matter what misrepresentations of the facts you use to justify it) and I welcome your newfound maturity.
And Joe I think the mushrooms you’ve been taking lately have really done wonders for you. Maybe the old Joe we all used to know and love is making a comeback. Keep it up!
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:29 pm
sweet pea, I’m just trying to get along with Jack. Don’t ruin the harmony.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:33 pm
Marjorie,
Now we are back with the program, very nice.
Believe me, I am not covering in the least for the crapweasel Democrats in Congress. Most of them should be rounded up and set adrift on a barge in the Gulf of Aden, no ransom forthcoming.
My point is I think it’s an exercise in futility and naivete to be getting worked up negatively over President-elect Obama. You have to have blinders on to not see that GW Bush has shown some serious bad judgement most notably on financial management. I think he went 7 years without vetoing a single bill, and has allowed the government to go on a prolonged spending binge. Sure the Democrats pushed the bad mortgage programs, but Bush did not exactly go to the well to stop them, now did he?
So it makes no sense to me for conservatives to treat Obama like a villain before he has taken office and especially in light of his recent actions. Yes, I agree, he is not going to be perfect from a conservative viewpoint. But neither is Bush, and we are not treating him like a villain, at least most of the time.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:38 pm
Ah alas, no shrooms for me. Not that I would have ever experimented, but if I had I’m certain I would have had to cease long ago after I would have realized they can only take you right back to your regular old self.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:40 pm
zimzo,
I’m sorry. Didn’t know that you were just having fun with Jack.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 5:42 pm
There is a big difference between giving Obama a chance and saying he is a “Prgamatic Democrat” – he is not even in office yet! These leaps and bounds to make him some kind of centrist are a bit premature, imho.
Joe, I never have argued that the Bush administration’s spending was a good thing, I’ll call a spade a spade – Bush is a big gov’t guy. Who knew? Not me, and very few prior to 2000 would have believed so. If you want to use this as evidence that Obama might actually be a centrist, pragmatic President – feel free. Guess what? Obama is an even BIGGER Gov’t guy. He is not to the right of Bush on spending, he is to the left – and a taxer to boot. So before he gets crowned king of the center, I’d like to see him make some decisions first.
No doubt reality has hit Obama in the face with national defense and security briefings, but how naive was he to campaign for almost 2 years on a policy of losing a war by pulling out, slashing defense spending, ending defense missile shields, abolishing all nuclear weapons and the coup de grace – unilateral talks with terrorists? I don’t trust someone that either can’t see the reality or won’t admit to it because he wants to get elected.
BTW, sour grapes is saying – McCain would have been so much better! I couldn’t care less about McCain – but at least he got it on terrorism, national defense and hopefully the Supreme Court.
Lastly, I think there are very few on the right or left that wants Obama to fail – our economy is fragile and we are at war. If Obama proves himself to be a “good” President – hallelujah! Let’s wait till he is in office till we make that determination.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 6:11 pm
Cathy, I am glad you were able to get the rant out of your system before coming to the final sentence which is not far from what I have been saying.
No one is crowning him a good president, but I am noting he seems a whole lot less problematic than what I had been led to believe from reading the stuff he wrote, seeing who he hung out with and hearing the things he said.
Maybe the discrepancy here is that I was both VERY VERY negative on Obama, while at the same time not all that freaked out about a Democrat winning the presidency, generically speaking. I was planning to spend the election season fishing and catching up on Boys Life, but instead found myself willing to throw the kitchen sink to keep Barack Obama out of the White House.
From what I have seen, I am relieved – so much so that I am tending toward a positive outlook. I see that I don’t speak for all conservatives. That’s fine. I would simply counsel against freaking out just yet especially in light of what we have put up with from the Bush administration. If you think mushrooms would help, I will see what I can do.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 7:22 pm
Perhaps we are on the same page just different paragraphs Joe, but I don’t think my post is quite a “rant.” I also wouldn’t term my post freaking out, my opinions on Obama are as passionate as yours on the Gentle Giants, or Giant Gentiles – or whatever that musician’s musicians group was called. I called that a rant
Sorry, I won’t use the words “relieved” or “positive outlook” in the same sentence with Obama till he actually does something I can be relieved or positive about. I see problems with some of his appointments, so much so that the potential problems we were talking about prior to election will not be the ones Obama has created. It is usually the unexpected events/problems that makes or breaks a President, so we shall see.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 8:12 pm
Joe,
Do I believe Bush failed, yes big time in issues such has illegals and deportation, the border wall built and financial in the sense he did not question harder, not given the border agents a pardon, better yet clearing their names. Quite a few things he could have done better on.
Yet, the war in Iraq is going to cost, however that aside, many in our government questioned Pelosi, Reid and Franks. They said all good. Let’s lay blame where it should be. They blame Bush, yet they did not speak up to change the situation they saw coming or when he and others questioned.
What I see if Obama makes it into office is the downfall of our nation.
He will shrink our military and weaken our nation’s defenses. White Flag of surrender when he pulls our troops out of the Middle East.
The radical Jihad’s will empower themselves and increase their attacks around the world and will begin here in the United States.
He will favor the Muslims and allow Islamic banking and Sharia law to be implemented. (Bailout funds in place for Islamic Bankng and Sharia law) He cares not for our Constitution, Bill of Rights and Declaration of Independence.
He will be faced with a terrorist act before the first 3 months in office, which he is ill prepared to handle.
He wants to lower taxes, ha-ha and spend more?
Perhaps all Americans should look into the Fairfax. It would solve the nations debit more quickly than anything else.
For all who are interested in finding out if Obama is a legal citizen, go to
Www. wnd.com
And sign the petition. So far there have been 133. Thousand plus signatures. All Signatures
To go to the Supreme Court Justices.
BTW: Obama a villian? As the saying goes: Beware of wolf in sheeps clothing.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 8:17 pm
Marjorie,
That’s the direction my thinking was going before the election, but in the choices he’s made and things he’s said since that is not what I think he will do. I think he has given the back of his hand to the far left.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 9:42 pm
Marjorie is ranting mindlessly.
“He cares not for the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence.”Is there any way that you can prove that “fact”?
“He will favor the Muslims….”
Do you realize that there’s a Senate and a House, together called Congress, that decides what laws to enact?
Do the Saudis have any better friends in the U.S than the Bush family? I believe they are Muslims! who won’t even let women drive a car or hold their own passports.
I have a strong inclination to call you a paranoid muslim hating rabble rouser, who seems to WANT things to go wrong for the new President. If things go the way you describe it, it won’t be because of the President but because of ignorant, intolerant folk like you, the 133,000 petition signers, and others like you.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 9:44 pm
Zimzo, I’m so proud! This post cried out for a “so now will you admit you were wrong about the Michelle Obama tapes” comment, yet you resisted.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 9:49 pm
Maybe you were wrong about me as well.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 9:56 pm
I just got a great idea for Christmas week posts: Things we all agree on. Determine issues on which we all agree and discuss them until viewpoints diverge, so we know what we actually disagree on.
Traffic would probably dive to pre 2006 levels, but it would be nice.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 10:31 pm
I think I’m going to cry.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 11:27 pm
Everything that is being discussed about Obama did not start since the election. There have been numerous individuals and groups that have requested information and documentation for several years without success.
The lawsuits started early last summer after his refusal to provide anything and he then hired a army of lawyers to defend his decision not to. The democrats also hired lawyers to participate in his withholding of discovery. The plaintiff’s had hoped to have the court compel him to prove that he was indeed eligible to be president long before the election was held.
The dems didn’t give a crap if he was legal or not, once he was the top candidate. At one point Hillary even questioned his background, she said the people have a right to know. One of the lawsuits was filed by one of her acquaintances.
Anything and everything about this man that did not show him as a vision of the Almighty was not reported by the mainstream media in any form and it is still not.
So, he may be a citizen of Kenya, he may be a citizen of Indonesia. He has been to Hawaii twice that I know of since all of this started and all he had to do was get the vault copy of his birth certificate, but no he had the Governor seal his records (maybe only a registration of birth, not a certificate of live birth).
He became a citizen of Indonesia after his step father adopted him. He went by a number of different names since birth. He visited Pakistan in 1981 when NO Americans were allowed in the country. His books were filled with proven inconsistencies by major Black publications. One was about him trying to bleach himself white until his skin was raw.
It has been said that he went to college and received aid for foreign students with his Indonesian passport. It is said that on his application for the bar, he said that he had never been known by any other names. It appears that he did not register with the selective service and that his name was recently added.
Anyway, he refuses to release any information about his past, education, GPA, medical, passports, birth certificates, . Well, once he ran for office, his business is our business .
At one point he was praising the Kennedy’s for paying for his fathers college education only to later say he was mistaken.
So, this is the man that just said recently to his flock that he would not keep secrets, that is unless the secret is about him.
December 2nd, 2008 @ 11:33 pm
Sour Pea,
“guns in private citizens hands, the meanness towards immigrants and the rabid hatred coming from conservative talk shows”
First, I think you would want to restrict gun ownership, just like every totalitarian government has just before they start ethnic purges, then the reason the constitution is written as it is written is to prevent people like you from getting changes easily. Thankfully, it takes 3/4 of the states to ratify any change. The reason is clear: to prevent a tyranny of the majority overrunning the rights of a minority, no matter how unpopular.
The idea that there could be a law against “hateful speech” is very well covered in the 1st amendment. If such a law existed, it could easily be used against people you never intended. Suppose a president decided it was wrong to commit adultery, and that it was hateful to talk about such things as it disrupted families, violated the trust between spouses, and was an evil in the land. Just talking about having sex with someone would then be one of your “hate crimes” … which I’m sure is not what you envision as the purpose. It is folly to want to restrict speech that does not have a clear and present danger to the life of at least some individual (such as yelling “fire” in a crowded movie theater). Why? Because if you restrict speech in one direction, if the winds of public opinion change, it will be restricted in the other direction just as easily.
December 3rd, 2008 @ 12:31 am
It would really be a tragedy if your ethnicity was purged Brian.
December 3rd, 2008 @ 4:42 am
Can’t we all just save our collective breath and wait until we see what Obama actually does after 20 January? There will be plenty of time after that to love him or hack away at him, depending on your political proclivities.
For my part, I will be watching very closely his reactions to the recent commission report on the possibilities for a future nuclear or chemo/bio attack by our terrorist enemies. All of us should be pulling very hard for the new C-in-C on that issue.
In the meantime, let’s have a little sympathy for old Joe Biden. He ran for Veep on the strength of his knowledge of and experience in international affairs. Now it looks like he may have to sit across the table from Hillary. I’d like to be there when he says “I disagree with you, Madame Secretary” once too often. Bet there won’t be any “global warming” in that Cabinet room!
December 3rd, 2008 @ 7:31 am
Lovisa,
There you go again, chasing the perverbal tail.
as for the saudis, they are really out for themselves. Period.
As for “I have a strong inclination to call you a paranoid muslim hating rabble rouser, who seems to WANT things to go wrong for the new President. If things go the way you describe it, it won’t be because of the President but because of ignorant, intolerant folk like you, the 133,000 petition signers, and others like you.”
Actually I do not hate Muslims, what I do dislike is their(Jihad Muslims) intention of destroying America and I and many others are not taking Obama at face value that you seem to be doing.
Have you ever asked yourself Lovisa just what he is hiding? That if Obama is a citizen than why not bring forth his documents and end all the lawsuits. No shomehow I think you being ignorant missed that one.
December 3rd, 2008 @ 7:57 am
Lovisa,
Just found this on the web, http://www.Jihadwatch.com.
If you’ve been watching world events than you should know that England now has Islamic Banking and Sharia Law courts.
To say the least, England is lost to Islam, below is a comment from a Muslim leader, once you read it maybe, just maybe you will understand why I protest the Islamic Movement in OUR COUNTRY.
UK Muslim leader: “In an Islamic state, non-Muslims will have to wear a sign to show what they are – it should say Kaffir. We won’t discriminate on height, race or appearance but we will discriminate on faith.” ( My My echos of Hitler’s Germany)
Choudary believes no non-Muslim is innocent:
RANTING Anjem Choudary launched an astonishing anti-British tirade as terror experts warned yesterday of a Mumbai-style massacre in Britain.
The hate preacher called for apartheid in the UK just days after backing the killers in India. And his supporters threatened to unleash “blood on the streets”.
December 3rd, 2008 @ 8:00 am
One More Lovisa:
Radical Muslims Succeeding In Taking Over The U.S.
December 2, 2008 by creeping sharia
By Herb Denenberg, The Bulletin
Radical Islam is subverting America without guns or bombs. That’s the subtitle of a frightening and important new book by Robert Spencer, one of the leading authorities on radical Islam.
We may have been spared the guns and bombs of the Islamofascist terrorists since 9/11, but we haven’t been spared their attempt to substitute the laws of Islam for the U.S. Constitution and to make America more like Iran, Saudi Arabia, or the Sudan, where the Muslim laws are in full force.
http://www.creepingsharia.com
December 3rd, 2008 @ 9:18 am
Marjorie: “There you go again, chasing the perverbal tail.”
If only Marjorie’s tail-chasing were preverbal.
December 3rd, 2008 @ 10:15 am
Zimzo,
word play again.. your too funny
December 3rd, 2008 @ 12:29 pm
Lovisa,
face value and the truth…….mmmmmmm
All of these were called from November 20 – December 2nd 2008. It is confirmed, OBAMA not born in any hospital in Honolulu County! NONE FACT!
Hospitals you can check yourself
The Queen’s Medical Center – Honolulu, Hawaii Obama claims as his birth hospital
Kapi’ olani Medical Center Obama’s sister claims Barack Obama born here
Honolulu Shriners Hospital Never a patient Mom or Obama
Straub Clinic & Hospital Never a patient Mom or Obama
Hawaii Health Systems Corporation – Honolulu, Hawaii Never a patient Mom or Obama
Cancer Institute of Maui – Wailuku, Hawaii No Comment ???
Kuakini Hospital – Honolulu, Hawaii Never a patient Mom or Obama
Rehabilitation Hospital of the Pacific – Honolulu, Hawaii Never a patient Mom or Obama
St. Francis Healthcare System of Hawaii – Hawaii Never a patient Mom or Obama
Straub Heatlh – Honolulu, Hawaii Never a patient Mom or Obama
Tripler Medical Center – Honolulu, Hawaii Never a patient Mom or Obama
Wahiawa General Hospital – Wahiawa, Hawaii Never a patient Mom or Obama
Wilcox Memorial Hospital – Lihue, Kauai, Hawaii Never a patient Mom or Obama
We were pretty detailed in our calls. You can look at every hospital here and call any of them. You can file freedom of information acts, you can do everything and anything you wish. Barack Obama was never born in a hospital in Hawaii as claimed.
Only his original that he has sealed will have this info. Will the Supreme Court force it open and thus preserve the Constitution of the United States?”
AND France is a goner too!
France embraces Shariah Compliant Finance
Posted by allysonrt on December 3rd, 2008
03 December 2008
Paris: The second edition of the French Islamic Finance Forum that took place in Paris on November 26th, welcomed some of the foremost sharia scholars in the world, highlighting the necessity to set up a genuine French-speaking sharia committee to advise on sharia-compliant operations in this region.
http://www.shariahfinancewatch.org/blog/
December 3rd, 2008 @ 2:21 pm
Thank ever so much, Marjorie, for all the time you have spent on me. I’m flattered. I’m taking it all in BUT
until it’s proven beyond any doubt, Obama is a bona fide US citizen, and
until it’s proven beyond any doubt that Obama intends to make the US into a muslim country
I refuse to accept rumors.
“We were pretty detailed in our calls…” Who are the “we” you are talking about? Which group are you representing? Is this your full-time job? To undermine a future president through insinuations?
December 3rd, 2008 @ 2:23 pm
“…, Obama is NOT a bona fide…”
December 3rd, 2008 @ 2:53 pm
Lovisa,
Just trying to spread some information to individuals whom do not know what to look for.
I’m all for higher education, but as the saying goes,
you can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink.
December 3rd, 2008 @ 3:48 pm
“The creeping socialism that so many seem to be alluding to lately is as much a result of the Bush administration’s spending on new things like the prescription drug benefit and failure to rein in expenses as it is the fault of the Democrats in Congress.”
Amen. Thanks a lot Mr. President. For you Mr Bonoir, stop crying, buck up and start acting like a conservative. If Republicans put in half the effort to restrain spending as they did acting like Democrats bailing out every special interest that comes down the pike we would be OK.
Trust but verify !
December 3rd, 2008 @ 4:10 pm
” If Republicans put in half the effort to restrain spending as they did acting like Democrats”
Another one in the 10 ring G..
December 3rd, 2008 @ 4:58 pm
I make these notices about islamic banking and sharia law for a reason;IT THREATENS AMERICA AND OUR CONSTUTITION.
To all, Islamic banking and Sharia go hand in hand, one cannot exisit without the other.
HERE is an article about AIG Insurance comapny and Sharia.
Article is as follows:
“Risk Specialists Companies, Inc. (RSC), a subsidiary of AIG Commercial Insurance, is introducing what it says is a first in the U.S.: a homeowners insurance product that is compliant with key Islamic finance tenets and based on the concept of mutual insurance.”
“The Takaful Homeowners Policy is underwritten through RSC member company A.I. Risk Specialists Insurance, Inc., in conjunction with Lexington Insurance Co. and in association with AIG Takaful Enaya. Headquartered in Bahrain, AIG Takaful Enaya was established in 2006 to provide Takaful products, including accident and health, auto, energy, property and casualty products.”
“The Takaful home policy is the first installment in Lexington Takaful Solutions, a series of Shari’ah-compliant (Takaful) product offerings in the U.S.”
“The Takaful Homeowners Policy builds on LexElite, the homeowners policy from Lexington that is sold throughout the U.S. The Takaful Homeowners Policy is available in all 50 states.”
“According to Jim Crain, associate vice president and personal lines underwriting director for Risk Specialists, the coverage, terms, commissions and sales proceduers are the same for this new products as they are for LexElite.”
“‘The introduction of Takaful products in the U.S. represents an important and emerging growth opportunity for AIG Commercial Insurance. We are pleased to offer socially responsible solutions to this segment of the domestic market,’ said Matthew F. Power, president, Risk Specialists Companies, Inc.”
“AIG Takaful Enaya is licensed by the Central Bank of Bahrain and its Shari’ah Supervisory Board is composed of Shari’ah scholars Sheikh Nizam Yaquby, Dr. Mohammed Ali Elgari and Dr. Muhammad Imran Usmani.”
“Risk Specialists Companies, Inc. is a U.S. surplus lines broker providing access to specialty casualty, property and personal lines insurance from Lexington and other AIG companies.”
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unitedstatesaction/message/18960
Sharia Finance: AIG Offers First Takaful Homeowners Insurance Product for U.S.
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2008/12/02/95930.htm
— U.S. Taxpayers have partial ownership of AIG
http://federalreserve.gov/newsevents/press/other/20081110a.htm
http://anti-jihad.org/blog/2008/11/stopsharianow
http://www.unitedstatesaction.com/blog/imm-articles/116.html
December 3rd, 2008 @ 8:53 pm
Here’s the deal. Osama-bama is a freshman senator. Some people think they know everything about a car when they show up at a dealership. They know how to turn on the radio, steer the wheel, brake, clutch, gas pedal and roll the windows up and down. But when they take a mechanics course all of a sudden a whole new and unexplained universe has opened-up before their eyes and they “see the light”. Barry is just “starting” to see the light and once he gets a full briefing as to what is going on, the Michael Jackson bleaching he was doing as a kid will pale to what reality will do to turning him white. Bush, in his 2004 debate and corny sayings said it all-”this job is tough”. Barry will soon realize he doesn’t have much choice in what he does. I would suspect that he will realize that he is WAY over his head and go running back home to Chicago, screaming!
December 3rd, 2008 @ 10:47 pm
OH, MAAAAAAAAN!
December 4th, 2008 @ 10:38 pm
I just don’t actually get what’s meant by “give him a chance”.
If you’ve been speaking truthfully in the past about the issues that are of concern to you regarding Barack Obama, then why should that change? He hasn’t changed. He hasn’t suddenly become a new person. Whether he appoints Democrats, Republicans, or Independents, he still has a track record of being someone who is not pragmatic, but self-serving at the expense of living up to a certain moral code.
Promising to take public financing and then switching at the last minute is not being pragmatic, it’s being self-serving, regardless of the moral consequences.
Being friends and colleagues with Bill Ayers, and then claiming he was just “someone in the neighborhood” wasn’t being pragmatic, it was self-serving and untrue.
Promising his constituents that he would “give” them health care as good as Congressmen wasn’t being pragmatic, it was self-serving and bordering on immoral in that it fostered a sense of entitlement that is dangerous for people in a democratic society to embrace.
It’s too soon for him to have changed enough to make it reasonable for conservatives to just stop thinking critically about his Presidency.
If Barack Obama is pragmatic, then George Bush was being pragmatic when he basically embraced socializing portions of the banking system. I think that’s what George Bush thought about his own choices, but I absolutely disagree with him. If it’s OK to say that you disagree with a Bush decision, it’s still OK to speak up and disagree openly with an Obama decision. Speaking truth to power IS giving them a chance while keeping them honest at the same time.
And, yes I know this was a rant, but I just couldn’t help it.
December 4th, 2008 @ 11:58 pm
Rachel, believe me I disagree with Obama decisions and statements. But we do have to move ahead and what is the most productive basis on which to do that? My opinion has changed because of what I have seen since he won. That’s all there is to it, that is my opinion.
Maybe we will get to discuss this in person?
December 6th, 2008 @ 8:13 am
“10 questions for Barack Obama”
Obama will have the entire time with Tom Brokaw on his Sunday talk show. POLITICO lists ten questions and the reasons for wanting answers to those particular questions. You might want to take a look.
December 6th, 2008 @ 10:31 am
“He hasn’t suddenly become a new person.”
Actually he has, he has become the President elect, soon to the President of these United States. Just as it was with Reagan, Clinton and Bush, we cannot predict what Obama the president will do based upon his record. The reality is the office does change the man.
For me, putting aside my differences with Obama to give him a chance is what I call “Country First”. Obama is a smart man, and I am sure he realizes that is was not the left that got him elected. The question that remains to be seen is how effectively will he rein in nutjobs Pelosi and Reid.
As Joe points out, Obama has planted himself firmly in the center with his post election actions. With that, he has come to me more so than I have gone to him. And for that, he gets a few Brownie points…
December 8th, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
Dans, the office does change the man (to a certain extent), but he has not taken office yet. If winning the election makes him change drastically in just over a month, then by the end of his first term he should be a card-carrying Republican.
Putting “Country First” does not mean ignoring the past actions and proposed policies of the winner of a Presidential election. If the term “pragmatic” becomes a synonym for “self-serving” then that’s not going to be a good thing for the country in the long run.
I don’t have a problem agreeing with Obama’s choices and policies when they are right, but I think it’s unhealthy to ignore his past actions and stated policies in the name of “Country First”. I’d rather go into the next administration with my eyes open than put on blinders and pretend I don’t know his history and documented inconsistencies. If McCain had won, a lot of conservative Republicans would have definitely switched into “monitoring” mode to ensure McCain didn’t start moving more towards the center, because that wouldn’t be good for the country (in my opinion). I see no reason to deal with a President Obama any differently.
December 8th, 2008 @ 12:07 pm
Joe, I respect your position, but of course disagree. I will write in in 6 months and acknowledge I was mistaken if I find that you guys were right on this.
—
I’ve been warned away from a certain establishment for health reasons.
December 8th, 2008 @ 1:06 pm
Rachelfriend
“he has become the President elect soon to the President ”
Yes, I believe this means he has not taken office yet.
There is a world of difference between pragmatism and unfounded fear.. Like I stated, I have not moved closer to Obama, he has moved closer to me. This is why I am being pragmatic.
December 8th, 2008 @ 1:36 pm
I heard Obama can move mountains – we shall see!
December 8th, 2008 @ 2:05 pm
Yes, Cmac, and we shall also see if he has made the seeing blind..