Obama's Cabinet looking hawkish

Onceler said:
Might be prudent to see what the actual policy will be before you spout your mouth off for the umpteenth time.

Just a suggestion.
Click to expand...

You can usually tell what the policy will be by the players... well, YOU can't, but more sophisticated and advanced non-retarded people can. He has stacked his cabinet with non-anti-war people, and hawks. He is already backing off his campaign rhetoric about an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, which was reduced to a 16-month withdrawal before the election, already. Now, it is limited to 'combat forces' and 16-months is turning into 36-months. In short, Obama's plan for Iraq is the Bush plan for Iraq.

Aside from Lieberman instead of Hillary, the cabinet is almost exactly what John McCain would have gone with. Oh....but he's NOT BUSH! I forgot, that was all that fucking mattered in the whole wide world!

Annie asked where is Kusinich, hell... where is John Kerry? Where are ANY of these people who were so vocally opposed to the war in Iraq? They certainly aren't part of the Obama administration!
 
"You can usually tell what the policy will be by the players... well, YOU can't, but more sophisticated and advanced non-retarded people can"

Nah; most people can usually tell what the policy will be by the views of the person who sets that policy.

Aren't you the hick who thinks Iraq wasn't about WMD's, and the Civil War wasn't about slavery?
 
Onceler said:
"You can usually tell what the policy will be by the players... well, YOU can't, but more sophisticated and advanced non-retarded people can"

Nah; most people can usually tell what the policy will be by the views of the person who sets that policy.

Aren't you the hick who thinks Iraq wasn't about WMD's, and the Civil War wasn't about slavery?
Click to expand...

Well I am not a "hick" but I know Iraq was not about WMD's and the Civil War was not about slavery. That's pretty good, you got two out of three right! And as I say, most people who have some level of insight and intelligence, can tell what policies will be by who the players are. They certainly aren't going to drastically conflict with the positions taken on record by the rest of the team, that makes no sense whatsoever... which is probably why you believe it possible.
 
This type of development really shouldn't surprise anyone. Obama was speaking like a hawk over the last 4-6 months. The dovish rhetoric was used at the beginning of the campaign. This was mostly like done because the Obama camp knew that the antiwar crowd would be paying attention early; the swath of undecided voters who really decide elections would not actually be paying attention until probably September or even October. I think it's fair to say that Obama telegraphed all of this as he's been stepping up the rhetoric against Pakistan and Iran for a long time. Moreover, he's never once mentioned the idea of not having permanent bases and the largest "embassy" in the world in Iraq. We're going to have some level of troops there for a long, long time. Let's also not forget how much Obama, and especially Biden, "love" Israel. By love, of course, they mean that they want to continue arming them to the tune of $4 billion/year or more.

This is one of the main reasons why I could not vote for Obama. He's scantily different from Bush on foreign policy.
 
Annie said:
Yet it was so easy from Springfield and he made a point that the MSM would pick it up. Funny that none on the left bother about his change. Same on the right, chastising him for the grandstanding.
Click to expand...

I agree .. does anyone think he would nothave voted FOR the resolution had he been in the Senate.

Of course, he also has a habit of skipping important votes so he doesn't have to take a side.
 
Onceler said:
Might be prudent to see what the actual policy will be before you spout your mouth off for the umpteenth time.

Just a suggestion.
Click to expand...

yes, how DARE BAC share his views and opinions on what he thinks will happen. Put him in his place Lorax. He should know better.... teach him a lesson.

:rolleyes:
 
Dixie said:
You can usually tell what the policy will be by the players... well, YOU can't, but more sophisticated and advanced non-retarded people can. He has stacked his cabinet with non-anti-war people, and hawks. He is already backing off his campaign rhetoric about an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, which was reduced to a 16-month withdrawal before the election, already. Now, it is limited to 'combat forces' and 16-months is turning into 36-months. In short, Obama's plan for Iraq is the Bush plan for Iraq.

Aside from Lieberman instead of Hillary, the cabinet is almost exactly what John McCain would have gone with. Oh....but he's NOT BUSH! I forgot, that was all that fucking mattered in the whole wide world!

Annie asked where is Kusinich, hell... where is John Kerry? Where are ANY of these people who were so vocally opposed to the war in Iraq? They certainly aren't part of the Obama administration!
Click to expand...

DAMN .. we agree again.

The one thing I've said consistently since the general election began is the truth of Obama will be revealed in the cabinet he chooses and the people he places around him.

To believe that he would run from the right of center during the general, then pick an ENTIRE right of center cabinet, then govern from the left is quite delusional .. just as is the belief that a man of peace would choose a cabinet full of hawks.

What this all demonstrates is that democrats can goosestep just as easily as republicans.
 
Conclusion drawn by me:

He is not going to be nearly as bad as the far right thought/think and not nearly what the far left wanted. He will govern center/left.

Though I disagree with him greatly on some things I am anxious to see how he governs.

I will not be ordering any Obama commemorative plates though.
 
Dungheap said:
Are you out of your fucking mind? (Don't answer that). Being against the war in 2002-03 was about as popular as penile discharge.
Click to expand...

You really do have a problem comprehending people. He did not say that being against the war at the time was a popular position. He stated that Obama took the position with an eye to the future.
 
Dungheap said:
Are you out of your fucking mind? (Don't answer that). Being against the war in 2002-03 was about as popular as penile discharge.
Click to expand...

Obama is quite possibly the most calculated man in human history. To the calculated eye, Iraq was the ticket. It did not take rocket science intelligence to see the invasion of Iraq would end in failure.
 
Dungheap said:
100% positive that you think he would have skipped the vote?

I definitely maybe think you're way off base.
Click to expand...
Yeah, because he has never had a record of doing anything like that while carefully making speeches that do not commit him to anything. Not at all.
 
Superfreak said:
You really do have a problem comprehending people. He did not say that being against the war at the time was a popular position. He stated that Obama took the position with an eye to the future.
Click to expand...

Correct.

It didn't take genius to see through that fraud.
 
Superfreak said:
You really do have a problem comprehending people. He did not say that being against the war at the time was a popular position. He stated that Obama took the position with an eye to the future.
Click to expand...


So basically the idea is that in 2002 Obama took a position on the war that was contrary to virtually everyone save the leftiest lefties with an eye towards the future because he knew that, while he secretly supported the war or was indifferent to it, his ticket to the presidency was to oppose an extremely popular war with the knowledge that the war would go to shit and everyone would hate it in 2008?

If that were actually true I think I would like Obama more than if he simply opposed the war. He'd be one prescient motherf*cker.
 
Damocles said:
Yeah, because he has never had a record of doing anything like that while carefully making speeches that do not commit him to anything. Not at all.
Click to expand...


You folks actually Obama would have been one of 4 members of Congress and the only Senator to not vote on the AUMF and that in doing so he would have improved his electoral prospects?

The ODS is catching quicker than I thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top