Obama: buyers' remorse?

[Monkeyleg]

Watching the formation of Obama's cabinet and administration over the last week or so, I wonder how many diehard supporters are having second thoughts. They're not being very vocal if they are, but I think we'll hear from them soon.

He ran against the Iraqi war, but now is keeping Gates on as defense secretary, and is also sounding like troops will come home when the time is right. IOW, his strategery is looking a lot like Bush's.

He ran promising tax cuts for the middle class and raising taxes on "the rich," but has brought on finance advisers who are supply-siders, and is starting to backtrack on tax increases on anyone. At least short term, his economic policies look like those of GW.

Some of his financial advisors don't believe in universal healthcare, think that it would be a disaster, and favor a smaller and more tailored approach to health care. Bush again?

He ran promising to bring change to Washington, but selected a DC insider for VP, ala Dick Cheney. GW, anyone?

I'm beginning to think that the people who wanted real change should have voted for McCain.

[De Selby]

How are these policies, as they're shaping, any different from those of McCain/Bush's?

I think you're right that people are wondering about their support, but honestly, it looks to me like what they got was McCain/Bush policy even while they voted for something different.  It wouldn't make sense to vote for McCain just because Obama was going to be the same as McCain.

[Standing Wolf]

Sorry, but was he the Republicrat or the Democan?

[MicroBalrog]

How are these policies, as they're shaping, any different from those of McCain/Bush's?

I think you're right that people are wondering about their support, but honestly, it looks to me like what they got was McCain/Bush policy even while they voted for something different.  It wouldn't make sense to vote for McCain just because Obama was going to be the same as McCain.

And vice versa.

[TommyGunn]

The uber-lefties are already in a hissy-fit over Obama's choices.  
He claims he's bringing back the Clintonista kakistocrats because they're experienced but there are other liberal choices out there he's ignoring.
Clinton was a liberal too and governed (usually) in a more practical manner, abandoning extreme leftist ideology for what was actually possible.
Obama's going to have his hands full with the Pelosi/Boxer Brigade; the leftists in kongress are going to be nipping atr his heels .  .   .   .  . . . .

[Waitone]

Just one more indicator DC is a two party town--them and us.

Another indicator?  Gates staying on at DoD.

[Viking]

Sorry, but was he the Republicrat or the Democan?

Yes.

[longeyes]

Anyone who thinks that a true "radical," rightwing OR leftwing, could have gotten as far as Obama has is delirious.  He is part of The Continuum.   Clinton and W. were prophets preparing the way for this new Messiah.   Clinton laid out the social agenda.  Bush has handed Obama the corporate socialist playbook.  Now it's Obama's time to cook the turkey.  Our job, as The Ignored Party of the People, is to come to grips with who really employs all three of them.

[Werewolf]

Maybe REALITY reared up and smacked Mr Obama upside the head.

[Judi Tenuti voice]It could happen... [/Judi Tenuti voice]

[Monkeyleg]

Our job, as The Ignored Party of the People, is to come to grips with who really employs all three of them.

Would this be the Trilateral Commission or the Skull and Bones Society?

Vast conspiracy theories are entertaining. The Pentagon has a difficult job keeping classified documents from leaking to the New York Times, yet there are people who believe that our country or the world is controlled by some super-secret cabal. Is Howard Hughes still the ringleader?

[MicroBalrog]

Would this be the Trilateral Commission or the Skull and Bones Society?

Vast conspiracy theories are entertaining. The Pentagon has a difficult job keeping classified documents from leaking to the New York Times, yet there are people who believe that our country or the world is controlled by some super-secret cabal. Is Howard Hughes still the ringleader?

Conspiracy theories?

I don't think you need to be too tinfoilhatted to believe that not all is as it seems.

[longeyes]

Would this be the Trilateral Commission or the Skull and Bones Society?

Vast conspiracy theories are entertaining. The Pentagon has a difficult job keeping classified documents from leaking to the New York Times, yet there are people who believe that our country or the world is controlled by some super-secret cabal. Is Howard Hughes still the ringleader?

Don't ask me, ask David Rockefeller.

But don't expect him to tell you the truth.

You know the line, the Devil's greatest accomplishment is persuading us that he doesn't exist?  It is foolish to believe the world is run by conspiracy; it is foolish to think that it is not.  It is not about "conspiracies," it is about confluence of interests.   People help each other; people of great power help each other greatly.

What is leaked to the NY Times by the Pentagon is not what matters, it is just the kids playing in the den. 

[MicroBalrog]

I've said it before and I say it again:

I do not believe that there is a secret group called the Bilderbergers or whatever, out to destroy the world.

I do however believe that, due to the unique blend of socialism and capitalism that exists in Western societies today, the balance of power has shifted towards the social elites – government bureaucrats, media hacks and the corporations that lobby them, as well as people like George Soros. These people DO in fact meet at places like the Bilderberg Hotel and the Bohemian Grove, and they are far more sinister than we normally believe – but not in the straight-on sense that people like Alex Jones would like to believe. They are sinister – in the sense that they think that they know what's best for all of us. The physical Bohemian Grove may be real, but it is only an expression of how skewed society has become,rather than a cause of it.

Further, I believe that there are trends, social and cultural in our society, that help move us towards bad things – like social-democracy, world government, etc.  These intellectuals, corporate bigshots and  bureaucrats that are moving us there are not working in a vacuum.

[longeyes]

There is, I agree, nothing darkly clandestine about the way that cultural sub-groups smell their kinship and act in social concert.  When members of the Washington Post editorial staff meet to decide what to cover and how and by whom, it is not done by candlelight, in hoods, in hushed tones.  It just "happens" that there is broad agreement about how things should be done; this broad agreement began, for the happy campers, many years before, when the future leaders of America mastered reading, 'riting, and 'rithmetic. As for the Post and the other opinion makers and molders, you are hired and given a forum because you know how to dance the dance and will articulate, without being prompted, the views that serve the cause.

[BReilley]

I do have to wonder, these days, if McCain threw the election.  Some of the dumb-ass things he and his did...

[ArfinGreebly]

Conspiracy discussions come up frequently enough that I have a standard blurb on the topic.

Here's a quote of me quoting myself on the subject.

 

I'm always fascinated by the use of "conspiracy theory" in a pejorative sense, with the connotation that "anyone who believes in conspiracies is a nutjob/idiot/buffoon."

It's a little like people who use extortion as their primary mode, belittling others (who object to this) as being "extortionphobic" or some more refined word meaning the same thing.

A couple of years back I found myself in a discussion of exactly this kind; there, the "conventional wisdom" argument was that so-and-so was a conspiracy theorist.

My response to that is quoted in its entirety below.

It's worth noting that There's Always Some Conspiracy.  No, really.

You see, nothing gets accomplished by a mob.  Nothing gets accomplished by the Public At Large.  It's only ever done by individuals or Small Groups Of Committed Individuals. When the "small group" succeeds, they are patriots, or visionaries (history is written by the victors), and when they fail, or are discovered too early, or are referred to by the vanquished, they are conspirators.

But in truth they will only succeed to the degree that their plans and actions are kept hidden from those who are hostile to their goals.  And it doesn't really matter what that goal is, there is always someone willing to block it.

Want an object lesson in this?  Go tell everyone you know your most precious plans and goals.  Tell them how important it is for you to succeed at [whatever].  Now watch and listen.  Your "friends" and/or family will inevitably have, somewhere in their ranks, someone who throws up roadblocks.

You want to actually accomplish your goal?  Tell only those you trust, those who will stand by you through whatever may pass.  Now you have your very own conspiracy.

I mean, really, given the amount of random crap that has to be overcome, is there really any way to get something worthwhile done without a conspiracy?

[longeyes]

It isn't just "conspiracy," it is...hypnosis.

The ability to intimidate and subjugate.  And this is built into the human psyche.  What makes men with guns follow orders, slavishly?  They have been mesmerized by the icy stare of power, translated into "ideas" and "faith."  Some people know how to use this very effectively.

The Founding Fathers tried to bring us the clarity to see our rulers as they are.  Human-sized.  And vulnerable to free men.