Obama's Changing Policies Good and Bad

A dishonest man who tells you anything in order to be elected will, at least rhetorically, stick to his speeches.

An intelligent, honest man has more choices.

As Jack Kennedy remarked after being elected in 1959 “We were surprised to find that things were actually as bad as we said they were.”

Compound the fact that an intelligent, honest man will have to take into consideration - not only the secrets kept, and only recently shared with him by the outgoing administration - but will also have to deal with the dynamics of a collapsing economy and other influences that have either occurred or have intensified since he made his original plan and statements.

Those who fear his administration and want it to fail will, undoubtedly, seek and occassionally find legitimate fault that would exist under any administration. Still…the proof will be in what his detractors fear more than anything else…and that is the success of a first term in office that would lead to a second.

In the situation that our country is in, presently…to openly root for the failure of its leader is far from patriotic and those who participate are proving themselves to be of little value to the nation.

Jim, you must have missed some of my posts.

I have said repeatedly that I want Obama to succeed in doing what is best for the sake of the country.

I fear any administration that seeks to do this great country harm with stupid and ineffective policies that limit freedom and place the government as the definer of what is good for all.

I am tired of you claim of a lack of patriotism on the part of those that don’t agree with Obama.

If you want to excuse Mr. Obama when he proposes policies that increase the power of socialist state, go for it. But remember that at least some of us are paying attention.

An honest man can both support when appropriate and disdain when appropriate the policies of his favorite politician.

Are you honest?

What value is there in standing idly by while we are being pushed down the road to serfdom?

This country is the greatest on earth. Let’s keep it that way.

Meet your new energy secretary Steven Chu

Consider Steven Chu. A Nobel prize may sound like an impressive piece to add to anyone’s resume, but we all know that the Nobel Prize anymore is for the most prestigious person who can spout off the most asinine liberal tripe. Chu is no exception. Here is what the article has to tell us.In a sign of one major internal difference, **Mr. Chu has called for gradually ramping up gasoline taxes over 15 years to coax consumers into buying more-efficient cars and living in neighborhoods closer to work.
Somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe,” Mr. Chu, who directs the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory in California, said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal in September.
Now, how many of you are in favor of gradually increasing gasoline taxes over the next 15 years? ** How many of you favor $6 a gallon gasoline
, which is low in some European countries? Well, if you voted for Mr. Obama, that’s the kind of change his top advisers wish he would make. The fact is, oil, for all it’s perceived faults, is still cheap when compared to other alternative forms of energy. Mr. Chu knows as long as it’s cheap and efficient, it will continue to be the primary source of energy…so he thinks that by artificially inflating the price, it will force Americans to turn to other forms of energy. The problem is that such a plan might sound good to an environmental whacko, but to anyone with any familiarity with economics knows that such an artificial price boost on America’s most valuable resource this side of water is economic suicide.

This is interesting:

Richardson withdraws bid to be commerce secretary](http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D95GHJPO0&show_article=1)

WASHINGTON (AP) - New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson on Sunday announced that he was withdrawing his nomination to be President-elect Barack Obama’s commerce secretary amid a grand jury investigation into how some of his political donors won a lucrative state contract.

Richardson’s withdrawal was the first disruption of Obama’s Cabinet process and the second “pay-to-play” investigation that has touched Obama’s transition to the presidency. The president-elect has remained above the fray in both the case of arrested Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich and the New Mexico case.

A federal grand jury is investigating how a California company that contributed to Richardson’s political activities won a New Mexico transportation contract worth more than $1 million. Richardson said in a statement issued by the Obama transition office that the investigation could take weeks or months but expressed confidence it will show he and his administration acted properly.

I’ve seen ads where he is going to give us a 300 Million tax cut and also promoting clean coal technology, is he going to flip on everything he said, I wonder. Somebody take his Credit Card please!

**Is this the change this country voted for?

Obama Predicts Years of Deficits Over $1 Trillion

** …Even if the package of spending and tax cuts helps restore the nation’s immediate economic health, Obama said, the government is likely to be left with “trillion-dollar deficits for years to come” unless policymakers “make a change in the way that Washington does business.”

“We’re going to have to stop talking about budget reform. We’re going to have to totally embrace it. It’s an absolute necessity,” the president-elect told reporters a day before the Congressional Budget Office is set to release its outlook for the coming year.

There are two ways to “reform” the budget toward balance.

  1. Real cutbacks in government spending

  2. Increasing taxes to balance the budget

Now ask yourself which one is likely to occur.

There is actually a third option and that is to inflate the money supply by printing more money and devaluing everyone’s assets. :shock:ML

**Key Senate Finance Dems oppose Obama’s tax proposals **

**by SusanG **

Fri Jan 09, 2009 at 10:00:04 AM PST

Democrats on the Senate Finance Committee met in private yesterday and emerged voicing opposition to some of the central tax proposals put forth by President-Elect Obama in his economic stimulus package, according to CNN:

In particular, members said they did not think the idea of giving employers a $3,000 tax credit for each employee they hire would work.
“I’m not that excited about that,” Sen. John Kerry told CNN. “Having a tax credit for hiring is not going to change that dynamic — creating a direct job will. So I’d rather spend the money on the infrastructure, on direct investment, on energy conversion and other kinds of things, much more directly and much more rapidly and much more certainly create a real job.”

Sen. Kent Conrad agreed. “I think it’s unlikely to be effective,” the North Dakota senator told CNN. “If you think about it, business people are not going to hire people to produce products that are not selling. Who is going to hire in the auto industry if you give them a $3,000 credit to make cars that people are not buying?”

I know one thing, if Obama’s public works plan does go into effect I’m buying stock in Caterpillar… Seriously!!

Mike why don’t we let the man move his belongings into the white house before deciding he’s not doing his job.

Keeper, thanks! :smiley:

The Best of George Bush!

Barack Obama “Uh” Count

more “Uh”](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tk5aAB7YlgU)




Well said Jim, personally I rather we had an “Honest man” there than another stuffed shirt (of either side’s) lets hope we have one.