Welcome Guest
( Log In | Register )
The time is now 4:54 pm
You last visited January 22, 2017, 3:13 pm
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

The Audacity of Hope


Obama is running out of feet to shoot.

Now that Obama has safely secured his spot on the ballot in November, he can tell us what he "really meant" on issues that got him the primary win in the first place.

Call it what you may, but it is flagrant pandering for votes from so-called conservatives, fence-sitting independents, evangelists and every group he speaks with .  The chamelion has come out of the closet and is changing colors faster than we can change the backdrop.

Since he has become the presumptive nominee he has backtracked on all of the issues that got him there in the first place, including:

-- Ending the war on the American Public's timetable and not the military-industrial-political timetable.

-- Voting No on FISA in February and voting Yes in June.

-- He wants to continue and expand Bush's unconstitutional Faith-Based Innitiative with even MORE of our tax money.  (Remember that pesky little piece of paper that we used to call the Constitution which forbids government sanction or support of ANY religion?)

-- He now supports the death penalty for 'some' non-lethal crimes.

-- He supports the Second Amendment but with even greater zeal supports the government's right to restrict  and regulate it (e.g., BB guns will be legal as long as the barrel is at least 48 inches long, they must be painted pink, and you must pay a tax for that right).

The list goes on...

Obama was the only hope we had to avoid a third Bush term.  Now it looks like we'll have a third Bush term no matter who gets elected.  Barack Obama and Nancy Pelosi's inept Congress have chosen to 'compromise' on issues where there can be no compromise...the Law and our Constitution are examples.  So there will be no 'Change'.  'Change' has become an empty campaign slogan that gives hope where none exists.  In 2006 we were offered 'change' and we voted for it but it has yet to materialize nor is there any hint of 'change' on the horizon.

'Change' is 2008's mis-used word of the year and should be purged from the politician's lexicon.  (For that matter we're all tired of 'off the table' and 'on the table'.  Impeachment and War are not table settings.)

In his ruinous bid to capture a handful of special interest votes, Obama has lost many votes and a lot of respect from his base during the last two weeks alone.  Every single day there is news of him moving to the right on an issue.  His polling numbers against McCain are already dropping from two weeks ago.  Moving to the right in an already far-right administration (and arguably, Congress) is not a winning strategy, especially when polls clearly show that our President and our Congress have the lowest approval ratings in polling history.  His campaign manager should be fired when he reports for work on Monday.  Had Obama stayed on track he would have enjoyed non-partisan support from many camps and would have won the election in November handily despite the rampant vote fraud we've come to love and expect.  If he loses the election, he can look back to what he said in June '08 for the reasons why.  The GOP is going to pounce on these perceived flip-flops like Karl Rove on a cheeseburger.  When will the Democrats ever learn?

The Audacity of Hope has become just that...audacity.

Entry #146


MADDOG10Comment by MADDOG10 - July 5, 2008, 7:14 pm
I couldn't have said those things any better than you did Rick..! You're absolutely right saying when he does lose the election, he can look back and reflect while he eats those words with a cheeseburger...    Well said.....!
emilygComment by emilyg - July 5, 2008, 9:21 pm
Well said. He will not get a lot of the Clinton votes for it.
Rick GComment by Rick G - July 5, 2008, 9:41 pm
Thanks MADDOG. Today Obama said he was "puzzled" by the fierce reaction to his comments on ending the war. While he didn't change his objective about ending the war, these vague withdrawal comments have caused concern because they come directly on the heels of other real flip-flops (FISA, for example).

He has created a 'perception' of flip-flopping and it only takes a perception to lose an election. Ask John Kerry, Al Gore and Mike Dukakis.

The way I see it the only way he can redeem himself to his base is to vote NO on the FISA bill this week and stand up strongly with Senators Dodd and Feingold against it.   If he doesn't do that, then he is a bona fide, Grade A, cream of the crop flip-flopper.
Rick GComment by Rick G - July 5, 2008, 9:54 pm
Thanks Em. I agree that he has alienated the Clinton supporters. He has also alienated a whole swath of voters with a Libertarian bend who might have voted for him in a very close race. It's time for Obama to "man-up" before it's too late.
justxploringComment by justxploring - July 5, 2008, 11:15 pm
Rick, I haven't been following this as closely as you over the past couple of weeks. However, I watched every debate with Sen Clinton. In CA when asked by Politico I'm quite sure he disagreed with her when Clinton said she would not pull US troops out of Iraq immediately. She said she definitely wanted to end the war, but it had to be done cautiously to secure the safety of our troops as well as the safety of the Iraqi people who supported Americans. She said it wouldn't be fair to abandon them. Obama said he wouldn't wait. I know what I heard. Now he's saying he never changed his position. I clearly remember him saying "It's time for our troops to come home" and people cheering.   Look at this 2004 interview. It's so hard to tell if something has been "doctored" when it's on the net, but it sure sounds as if he's saying "I never said I think we should withdraw.."

JAP69Comment by JAP69 - July 6, 2008, 9:10 am
What a politician says on the campaign trail and what they end up doing has always left me disappointed. That goes for any political party campaigner.
time*treatComment by time*treat - July 6, 2008, 9:27 am
In the past, a voter only got to hear the speeches they went to in person or what the press put in front of them. It wouldn't be until long after an election that you got to hear conflicting talk from the same person. Now, many people have the 'net to dig (if they care) up this type of thing. They'll just have to get better control of that pesky internet for next time.
Rally the base for the primaries. Run to the middle for the general. That's how you win. Anyone who has principles (other than win-the-election-at-any-cost) and sticks to them ... can expect less than 10% of the vote.
Comment by scorpio - July 6, 2008, 10:24 am
if there was a woman vice president,now that would be change!
Rick GComment by Rick G - July 6, 2008, 10:37 am
Time*treat brings up an important point...the internet. It is too powerful a tool in the people's hands to let it continue as is. The powers-that-be will have to regulate it and censor it to put the people back in their cocoons where they belong. We will be thrown back to the days of relying on cable TV and newspapers (which are now owned by a handful of people) to get the "news" they want us to hear...i.e., propaganda.

ToddComment by Todd - July 6, 2008, 12:00 pm
@scorpio: I agree, a woman would truly shake things up, and would probably get things done in a way a man wouldn't. I would like to see a woman president. I just don't want to see Hillary as that first woman, because I think there is too much corruption and socialist tendencies there.
Rick GComment by Rick G - July 6, 2008, 1:48 pm
I would also like to see a woman president.   They've done a pretty good job of running other countries and I believe they are less prone to war.
justxploringComment by justxploring - July 6, 2008, 3:11 pm
Just something to throw out...don't you think this applies to everyone, not just politicians? I mean, if you recorded everyone's wedding vows, then more than 1/2 the men & women in this country are liars. :-)    People do change their minds all the time (for better or for worse!)

So my question is.. when is a flip-flop really just a change in perception?
ToddComment by Todd - July 6, 2008, 7:37 pm
@justexploring: It depends on what they changed their mind about, and if they are honest about changing it.

If someone comes out and says, "I changed my mind, and here's why..." then I think that is not only OK, but shows guts and character.

If someone trys to act as if their new position is the same that they always had, and even tries to spin it, then they are someone who is not to be trusted.

For example, many on the left try to criticize McCain about changing his mind on a border fence. However, he explained very openly that he clearly understood why the general public felt differently than his initial position, and he was convinced as to the importance of making sure the borders were secure before creating the guest worker program. He did not say "Now I don't want a guest worker program"; he instead said that he understood the wisdom of securing the borders before creating the program.

The same goes for McCain's position on oil drilling. He is holding firm to his opposition to drilling in Alaska (a position I disagree with him on), but has explained a new position he has on offshore drilling. And I think his explanations make sense, and are in line with what a clear majority of Americans support.

That is an example of honesty, or at least the courage to say that he's changed his mind.

What Rick G is stating here about Obama is different. It is very clear that Obama has no intention of explaining his 180-degree changes on several important issues, and will actually do what he can to distract people from seeing that he has changed his positions.

If he's a liberal, then by God, run as a liberal. If someone feels that a liberal agenda is what's best, then they should have the courage to say exactly what their positions are, and not try to mask everything in some nebulous "change" mantra.

Now Obama is trying to say he's really NOT for an immediate withfdrawal from Iraq. Pathetic!!
justxploringComment by justxploring - July 7, 2008, 6:31 pm
June 7, 2008 was a day I cried & cheered at the same time.


Maybe it isn't over yet.
Comment by scorpio - August 14, 2008, 5:29 pm
ok.we have to pick between hilliary,and candy rice for vp then.

You must be a Lottery Post member to post comments to a Blog.

Register for a FREE membership, or if you're already a member please Log In.