• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.

I've kept my mouth shut, but can't take it anymore

New posts
Just curious. What is it about this president elect that makes you and many others want to watch him so carefully? I hear this a lot from folks who did not vote for Obama but I do not recall ever hearing anything like this from folks whose preferred candidate did not win in any previous election. Even if they were watching and listening carefully I never heard so many declare there was a need to like I do these days...

:idontno:

Obama is inexperienced and new to national politics. He is a legislator, not a governer (as in person who govens, not a Governor) and how he will lead is an unknown. His record in the Illinois Senate and his short unfinished term as a U.S. Senator are not enough to let Americans know who he is. We all know that campaigns are full of rhetoric of bi-partisan promises and "reaching across the aisle." However, all indications, even this early, show that Obama is going to hit the ground running by fulfilling obligations to his party. For example, his appointment of Emanuel as Chief-of-Staff, a hard-line Clinton-ite, only demonstrates his commitment to the party. Talk of executive orders immediately upon taking office on issues such as Guantanamo, oil drilling, stem cell research, etc., only prove that he and his team want to make a dramatic turn to the left, not exactly bi-partisanship. I hope he proves otherwise, but until he does, I cannot trust him.

His past associations in college and early in his career show that he has had quite radical leaning tendencies. I'm waiting to see if he is going to maintain his associations with the Ayers and the Wrights and the Farakhans. While he disavows any connection with these men, time will tell whether he is being honest.

I'm uncomfortable with how his campaign has slighted the press that did not endorse him. I'm uncomfortable with how the press that did endorse him was so obviously slanted toward him. Geo, you proved this point yourself when you suggested that I listen to NPR as opposed to Rush Limbaugh and watch CNN and opposed to O'Reilly. Limbaugh and O'Reilly are political commentators and therefore openly take a stand. Limbaugh is conservative, while O'Reilly is Libertarian. When you listen to/watch their programs you know what you are getting. NPR and CNN are news organizations that are ethically supposed to present a balanced view of the news. Even you recognize that this has not been done and by your post prove the point that they are liberal leaning. However, not everyone has such a wide range of sources as I and while I get information from both sides, not everyone does. It alarms me that the media such as NPR and CNN and NBC, etc., present news as unbiased when in fact it is often very left-leaning. This does not bode well for those who are trying to find the truth and leaves it to the individual to sift through all the media and to watch our leaders in order to make judgments ourselves instead of letting the news tell us what to think. I do not trust the mainstream media to be objective about Obama.

Obama knows that he is being watched carefully. His staff knows that he is untested and that we are all waiting to be introduced to the Barack Obama as President of the United States. The moves he makes in the next few weeks will be very telling.

I want Obama to succeed, but I don't trust him yet. He is a politician after all, he is only a man and therefore has flaws. I hope he turns out to be a person of integrity, someone that I can respect even if our political views are different, but he will have to earn that respect from me.
 
After being personally bashed on SoWal for my political beliefs, I took a break, but I can no longer "let it go." When Barack Obama was elected, although I did not vote for him, I was willing to give him a chance. However, less than a week has passed since the election and there are disturbing signals from Obama and his team that this is going to be an interesting 4 years.

Below is a link where a member of Obama's team talks about the fact that he will be "ready to rule on day one." Add that to the fact that there is talk about a national holiday to honor him, and that he is planning to keep is campaign database handy (so he know who supported him ;-) ;-) so he can dole out pay-backs) and he is starting to sound more and more like a dictator.

I seriously thought that American Presidents GOVERNED, not ruled like a king. Silly me for misinterpreting the constitution--but that is all down the toilet anyway.

I've had my say and now let the personal bashing begin . . .

Don't forget the link:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner...0/obama-spokesman-says-obama-ready-rule-day-1


Camper you are taking this a bit to serious and the only people who are experienced to be President of the good ole USA are past Presidents of the USA. President Obama will do just fine. We have a system that makes any kind of controversial legislation difficult to pass, and he knows there is a lot of give and take to get anything through congress. I loose more sleep worrying about the aggressive tax structure of this county than who is President. Anyway, at the end of his first term, he will have earned your vote and support.
 
Obama is inexperienced and new to national politics. He is a legislator, not a governer (as in person who govens, not a Governor) and how he will lead is an unknown. His record in the Illinois Senate and his short unfinished term as a U.S. Senator are not enough to let Americans know who he is. We all know that campaigns are full of rhetoric of bi-partisan promises and "reaching across the aisle." However, all indications, even this early, show that Obama is going to hit the ground running by fulfilling obligations to his party. For example, his appointment of Emanuel as Chief-of-Staff, a hard-line Clinton-ite, only demonstrates his commitment to the party. Talk of executive orders immediately upon taking office on issues such as Guantanamo, oil drilling, stem cell research, etc., only prove that he and his team want to make a dramatic turn to the left, not exactly bi-partisanship. I hope he proves otherwise, but until he does, I cannot trust him.
Surprise! He is a Democrat not a Republican.

His past associations in college and early in his career show that he has had quite radical leaning tendencies. I'm waiting to see if he is going to maintain his associations with the Ayers and the Wrights and the Farakhans. While he disavows any connection with these men, time will tell whether he is being honest.
Non-issue for me.


I'm uncomfortable with how his campaign has slighted the press that did not endorse him. I'm uncomfortable with how the press that did endorse him was so obviously slanted toward him. Geo, you proved this point yourself when you suggested that I listen to NPR as opposed to Rush Limbaugh and watch CNN and opposed to O'Reilly. Limbaugh and O'Reilly are political commentators and therefore openly take a stand. Limbaugh is conservative, while O'Reilly is Libertarian. When you listen to/watch their programs you know what you are getting. NPR and CNN are news organizations that are ethically supposed to present a balanced view of the news. Even you recognize that this has not been done and by your post prove the point that they are liberal leaning. However, not everyone has such a wide range of sources as I and while I get information from both sides, not everyone does. It alarms me that the media such as NPR and CNN and NBC, etc., present news as unbiased when in fact it is often very left-leaning. This does not bode well for those who are trying to find the truth and leaves it to the individual to sift through all the media and to watch our leaders in order to make judgments ourselves instead of letting the news tell us what to think. I do not trust the mainstream media to be objective about Obama.
O'Reilly is a populist and espouses views very far from a Libertarian philosophy on many matters. Geo was suggesting that you listen/watch to NPR and CNN in addition to Rush, O'Reilly, Hammity, etc..not instead of. An "opposed to" option for Rush and ilk would be Randi Rhodes...have fun with that.

Obama knows that he is being watched carefully. His staff knows that he is untested and that we are all waiting to be introduced to the Barack Obama as President of the United States. The moves he makes in the next few weeks will be very telling.

I want Obama to succeed, but I don't trust him yet. He is a politician after all, he is only a man and therefore has flaws. I hope he turns out to be a person of integrity, someone that I can respect even if our political views are different, but he will have to earn that respect from me.
I distrust this last statement, and I hope that distrust proves unfounded, but like Obama's actions, the posts that are made in the coming weeks will be very telling.
 
Last edited:
No. He is the President-Elect therefore all his actions leading up to the actual inauguration are fair game. The team he has now is the same team he will have in the White House.

Correction; it's the "office of the president elect"
www.change.gov
 
Last edited:
Camp Creek, you have your mind made up and just keep rehashing negativity from the campaign. If there is a specific stated policy or idea you would like to discuss, I am certainly interested in hearing your views and opinions, but not in recycled sour grapes.

The majority of voters disagreed with you and elected Obama president. He campaigned on change and a different platform from the current administration. It is not fair to now criticize him because he now wants to actually change things in line with those same stated policies. Guantanamo, stem cell research, alternative fuel sources, drilling, are all things he clearly stated and discussed in detail during the campaign.

Yes, he is reviewing Bush's executive orders - as there were more than 250 of them and Obama and Bush differ greatly in their opinions, obviously there are some he will wish to counteract.

Yes, he has selected a fellow Illinois Congressman w/ experience in a Democratic White House as his chief of staff. As there has been only one Democratic president in the last 20+ years, obviously there would be ties to the Clintons if he chose someone experienced.

Yes, he wants prisoners in Gitmo to have trials instead of being held indefinitely without trial. This has been a shameful and anti-American practice that I certainly don't have a problem with him ending.

His connections to Wright (yes), Ayers (slight), and Farrakhan (no) and their possible influence and shared beliefs (or severe lack thereof) are quite well publicized and have been fully dissected and spotlighted by the media. How about we revisit them only if one of them shows up at the White House OR does something wrong in this decade?

Thanks to the internet and the wide variety of sources available, there are MANY options for information and enough independent voices that bias and secrecy are non-issues. It has always been the chore of intelligent people to sift through large amounts of information and evidence, weigh possible biases, and then decide for themselves which ones to believe. You can't find a 100% unbiased source, which is why you need to garner information from more than one.
 
Surprise! He is a Democrat not a Republican.


Non-issue for me.



O'Reilly is a populist and espouses views very far from a Libertarian philosophy on many matters. Geo was suggesting that you listen/watch to NPR and CNN in addition to Rush, O'Reilly, Hammity, etc..not instead of. An "opposed to" option for Rush and ilk would be Randi Rhodes...have fun with that.


I distrust this last statement, and I hope that distrust proves unfounded, but like Obama's actions, the posts that are made in the coming weeks will be very telling.


So many assumptions and preconceived notions. In fact I'm not a regular listener of Rush, Hannity, or O'Reilly. These days my driving entertainment consists of Disney DVD's.

I have not been elected to the office of President of the United States. In all due respect, and I mean this in a non-confrontational friendly way, I have no responsibility to you, whatsoever, for gaining your trust. I sincerely mean what I have said about wanting Obama to succeed, but if you don't believe me, I couldn't care less. We will never see eye-to-eye on all the issues, but I would hope that you would consider me a person of integrity and give me the benefit of the doubt as I do for you.
 
God, this is good! I hope this thread never dies!:popcorn:
 
Awesome website. What a great way for the American public to keep up with the transition, since so many get most info from the internet.

Kudos to Obama for keeping up with the times.

better read up on the site quickly, they've been "scrubbing it" over the weekend, changing controversial wording etc...
 
better read up on the site quickly, they've been "scrubbing it" over the weekend, changing controversial wording etc...

That's fine. I look at it at making an effort to appeal to more than just his supporters. Being sensitive to the way statements are worded is not a bad thing.
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter












                               
Back
Top