Democrats versus Republicans

[chucklesR]

I think that we'll know more when we know more

If the dreamy eyed, furrowed brow crowd can actually deliver or if the promise is just to much to deliver on and ends in the abject failure of false starts and over-reaching.
Will policies change, sure, will it matter - not one iota for most of them

(sure stem cell research might kick up a notch, but wary investors who know that returns take a decade of research, and the policy can change again in 4 years won't throw the serious money on it that it needs).

I think most of the executive order changes that will be made will be minor on the surface ripples (changing which crony gets control of which pocket of money for instance); don't look for waves of change there.
Look for big changes to come from the Pelosi-Reid corner of the ring (do rings have corners?). I'm betting the next raise for government workers sucks because he's going to ask them to take a hit as a show of patriotism, he'll trim 1% off the raise over cost of living - a paltry savings, just PR like most of the politicians brew.
Of course doing that puts more young soldiers and sailors on welfare, but we won't talk about that.

Obama is going to have to show his true colors once the paper hits his desk and he has to put ink on the paper; President's don't get to vote "present". He's got a leg up on Congress in that he's a media darling so he has a better ability to get his word on the street; it's the back room dealing with the majority leaders that we won't get to hear.

Won't it rock the socks of the posers and posters when he asks for the Columbia Free Trade bill to be pasted into the next economic stimulus package/wealth redistribution allocation to his fans er, voters? Nah, it's not going to change, it's just a new face.
I'm not convinced that he can bring change other than the contents of my wallet type change.

[sck5]

am I one of the "dreamy eyed, furrowed brow crowd " or am I one of the "posers and posters'?

I just love the imagery. Chuck you are so poetic. But you had it right in the beginning. We dont know much yet and wont until January. But what we DO know is that his appointments so far are way better than, e.g. heckuva job Brownie or some of the other jokers Bush put in. If this is cronyism then it is definitely better quality cronyism

[chucklesR]

Originally Posted by sck5

am I one of the "dreamy eyed, furrowed brow crowd " or am I one of the "posers and posters'?

I just love the imagery. Chuck you are so poetic. But you had it right in the beginning. We dont know much yet and wont until January. But what we DO know is that his appointments so far are way better than, e.g. heckuva job Brownie or some of the other jokers Bush put in. If this is cronyism then it is definitely better quality cronyism

Neither Sck.
Sorry to say it but for the most part you are just 'normal'.

[sailaway21]

If Obama "saves" the economy he'll be the first member of government to do so. All government is capable of doing, in strict economic terms, is screwing up the economy. Government does not create wealth. The economy and the free market do that. Government is a net consumer of wealth. Sorry, Obama nor the government are going to save the economy; the economy will save itself, the only question being, how much government impedes it.

I'll have to agree with CP in that sck has repeatedly missed his, and my, point. You cannot say that Obama is a competent president since he has never been president and, still, is not president.

As Camaraderie alluded, apparently Mr. Obama has a strange new respect for the current President. Apparently he must have read, or learned, something that caused him to not only reverse his Iraq policy but to keep Mr. Gates on as SecDef as well. The Clinton retreads show nothing if not lack of either imagination or inexperience. Holder is going to have trouble in the Senate confirmation hearings...you read it here first.

[erps]

The only thing that I've seen that Obama does know how to do is run for office, and get elected. He's gooood at a that.

Look, I don't fault the guy, but he ran on a campaign of smoke an mirrors, of warm smiles, and "change"... so far, NOTHING he's proposed or done, or hired has even whimpered "change".
I see where he's backed so far away from most of the "hot" buttons that people liked to be pressed for 'em, (tax rates on the rich, Iraq, Afgan, healthcare, that, if I didn't listen to some of his promises for change, I'd have thought we (shudder the thought) just elected a conservative. You can't tell me that in the less than a month from election night to today, things changed so much he had to chuck most of the promises he made.

Shhh! Someone might hear you and sound the alarm in the house of democrats. I'd prefer they all stay in la la land.

[PBzeer]

I'm wondering if in 4 or 8 years, there will be an "Office of the Former President"? Ya want real job security, get hired as Obama's logo and seal designer.

[PBzeer]

Actually Sway, it's just the appearance of "saving" the economy that matters. Don't have to actually do anything more than be in office at the time, to take the credit,

[sailingdog]

This thread is so much fun to watch for us anarchists...

[sailaway21]

It occurs to me that, in my denigration of Obama's seemingly lost promise of change, that it might be construed that I am against change in matters of the Federal government and this is hardly the case. My objection, at heart, to the promise of an Obama administration is not to change itself but to the fact that the desired change seems to be in the direction of more of the government problem we've already to much of. Expanding government, and it's reach, is not change, it's just expansion.

[sck5]

sailaway

most of us who have gotten our quarterly retirement fund statements sure do wish the government had expanded a bit in the direction of regulating the insane excesses of the financial wizards on Wall St. The meltdown didnt come out of the clear blue sky - It came because the government decided to "let the markets self-regulate". One of the ways markets do that is with periodic crashes. Most of us dont like that. I bet you dont either. This didnt have to happen and we need to expand the regulation enough to make sure it doesnt happen again.