Sheesh, the guy is not even in office yet and people are predicting all sorts of stuff.
Indeed, they like to predict he will be wildly successful, and solve all the world's problems.
He was elected because people in this country wanted a change, and, gosh darn it, can ANYONE here deny that we need one?
Every time I see someone say this, I feel the need to point out... "change" is not of any value in and of itself. "Change" can only be good or bad based on what is being changed from, and what is being changed to. To deny change is needed is to invite death, as all life is change, based on the world around us. I daresay Bush's plans for his presidency changed quite dramatically on September 11th.
Give the guy a month or two in office at least before everyone starts getting all over him.
Why? He's stated quite clearly his intentions throughout his campaign. Granted, he's changing his intentions from what he has said in many ways, but he has also reiterated and even strengthened some (tax cuts for people that don't pay income tax, civil armies, etc.). There is no reason not to argue with stuff you disagree with just because he's just officially started. Sorry to rain on anyone's parade, but he's already started.
Freddy, sorry to derail your thread, I am looking forward to Obama while I know you are not. But, seriously, I can NOT understand how ANYONE supported Bush. I have police and military associations within my own very close family, and I still fail to see the relevance of a man who wanted to suspend freedom and civil rights over a possible terrorist threat. Someone who was so blindsided about American capitalism that the whole system went amock with greed. You may be okay with this legacy, I am NOT.
I don't know how anyone supported Bush either, at least, if they paid any attention to how much he spent on government programs the democrats wanted. Essentially, he tried to please everyone, and pleased no one. As for suspending freedom and civil rights, that's a gross exaggeration, and a failure to deal with the reality of terrorism. Capitalism IS about greed. As the immortal Gordon Gecko stated so simply, greed is good. But, saying that capitalism is responsible for the financial meltdown is actually completely the opposite of what actually happened. The financial meltdown happened due to the greed of liberal democrats buying poor people's votes by getting them houses they couldn't afford, and getting themselves rich at the same time (Just take a closer look at any of Obama's financial advisors, and their relationship to freddie and fannie). Granted, Bush didn't do a thing to stop it, probably out of a desire to help people, as he has in Africa, as well as here. Of course, it's hard to find media reports on any of that.
Yes, the media are on this, so step back a bit and see it for what it is worth, gushing headliner positioning, nothing more. What Obama will say, what Michelle will wear, what sort of dog they choose.
n the long run, I think Obama will be a very good president, at least he seems to listen ad has no weird agenda to stick towards, compared with Bush who clearly wanted to emulate and upstage dad. (FWIIW, I think Bush Sr. was a far more credible person than his son turned out to be. Do not even get me started on Cheney, the worst sort of what American capitalism has produced.
How was Cheney bad exactly? And what did it have to do with Capitalism?
Obama for me at least is like a breath of fresh air into a government that reeked of closedmindedness and fear of anyone looking too closely at them. Good riddance after bad garbage, and they left us with tons of it.
Can Obama clean it all up? Probably not, but at least I am willing to give him a fair shot at it. What a job that must look like right now.
Well, Obama doesn't have to fear anyone looking too closely at him, as he has the media surrounding him with a protective cloud of misinformation that is nearly impossible to penetrate. I find that far more disturbing than anything about Bush.