Experience Project iOS Android Apps | Download EP for your Mobile Device


I think that Obama's campaign focused sooo much on "change" that now people are expecting wayyy to much out of him. I do not support Barack Obama nor do I think we will be seeing any change, at least in this term. His next campaign speech he will be saying he needs four more to do what he promised this time.

MissThang420 MissThang420 18-21, F 64 Responses Jan 21, 2009

Your Response


I disagree. I have seen many instances on here where people have really confronted their beliefs and in some cases even changed their opinions based on arguments presented. Of course this doesn't happen often, usually the arguments are made and taken personally, and then the discussion devolves into an anonymous fight of insulting words. <br><br />
<br><br />
Even if people do not change their minds because of what people say to them here, at least they are forced to re-examine why they think what they do. It takes courage and humility to admit wrong.

Ok so this is very interesting reading I have to say. I can see two very passionate sides trying to state there case and play my side is right. So I may not agree with Obama but since he is my husband new commander and cheif I will support him to the best of my abilities. I dont think this war will ever really be over. It cant there are two sides that are very different. It is just like this forum and like this forum nobody can agree to disagree one side has always got to be right. This war will probably end up with the Iraqi government being what they consider democratic which is no were near what we think of democtatic. With a base or two of american soldiers. Just like what we do in Korea. In this country there are sheik that contol each citywhich is usually corrupt as hell. But that is just how it is. I do think some change will come but what that is I have no clue nor do I think any does. During Obamas campaign he was the typical politican he told us what we wanted to hear. Like getting out of this war. Hate to break it to all but even Obama admitted that it is not going to happen for atleast 4 more years and that an additional 30,000 troops will be going to Afghanistan. I have to agree with MitchandMaureen the "job will never truly be finished". I love how people say that Bush lied to us about the war. This is one of my favorite comments. Yeah Bushed lied to us cause the intelligence commitee lied to him. Now aint that a good kick in the *** when that happens. It is just like with 911 if the intelligence committees would have gotten off there I am better than you then none of this would ever be happening but no one ever says that. No one ever says yeah this whole thing started because our intelligence agencies wanted to be ********. That is why I am happy that Obama chose his people the way that he did. He didnt just pick his friends cause they wouldnt lie to him. You know what they say keep you friends close but your enemies closer. With Gitmo Obama signing a piece of paper is just that I piece of paper. Who knows when all of that is actually going to happen. They have all of those people there. What are we goig to do with them? OUr soldiers are doing some great things over there that no one ever talks about which is a shame. Even civilians are doing great things in these two countries. I wish that reporters would show that more often but as a CNN executive was heard over saying "if it bleeds it leads". God Bless our troops and the great things they are doing over there.

of course he did something right, in 2000 he was selected and in 2004 he was elected. In the 2004 election, he accomplished this thanks to the patriotic effort of the "swiftboat veterans for smearing". After that.... um...errrrr..... well he did do a little to help AIDS in Africa. That's it. <br />
<br />
We had weapons inspectors on the ground before the invasion who tried to tell us there were no weapons, so why would I believe that these mysterious WMD's that no one has ever seen were in Iraq but were moved out before we could find them? Occam's razor applies. <br />
<br />
Instead of relying on hard evidence from Hans Blix, we relied on evidence gathered through torture (which doesn't even count as evidence because of how it was obtained) that linked Iraq and Al-qaida. <br />
<br />
And the rest is, as they say, history.

Well said Keithseeker. Everyone agreed on the WMD issue. ( I personally believe they are in Syria. They had plenty of time to move them there.)...<br />
I don't think I could add to what Keithseeker has said .<br />
Mr. Bush did run two terms, so He must have done something right.

i think it is great that we have barack obama i think he is what we need if mcain was in office it would be just like george bush all mcain could do was bash on obama i wouldnt want that for president

Whuttup 12...I am not “glossing over everything with a broad brush”. I would say that you take an incredibly narrow view of what is and what isn’t. I have never defended Bush and the reality is he did not act alone. Congress did vote to allow the commander-in-chief to take military action and go to war. That is the “devil in the details”. People like Clinton who voted in favor of. People like Levin who voted in favor of. Two individuals who had more access to classified information that most others in Congress. passed Congress. They gave the Commander-in-Chief the right to go to “war”. If you want to talk details then talk about the numerous UN actions taken against Iraq since 1991. Talk about WMD that were in Iraq prior to our attack. The numerous Syrian and Russian soldiers and scientists who provided information that weapons were removed from Iraq prior to our attack. Remember when you announce your intentions to attack a country months before they might take some action. Do some research prior to 2001 about this issue. You might be surprised what you will find but you need to dig deep...real deep. I was surprised.<br />
Gitmo is a different issue. Although he did ask for a “legal opinion” and they stated that it was legal I question the judgement overall. <br />
But again lets look at the larger picture of how our government has let us down. The only issue is not Iraq. It is the economy, globalization, government greed, government waste, etc... We are witnessing the death of our Republic. Now you may like that but I do not. For the last 75 years, we have seen pieces put in place to destroy the Republic. Since the 70's we have seen our system taken off of the gold standard, NAFTA, utilization of the UN for peace-keeping missions, de-regulation of the banking system (and other systems as well), more power given to the Federal Reserve (which is not a government agency...they report to the banking industry). <br />
I am not a victim. You continue to view things as conservative vs liberal. Both sides have utilized that argument in many different ways through the years. That is not the issue facing us today. We have become a very lazy society. We have become a society of entitlement. We have become a society that thinks we are owed. Apathy has taken over our society. Again...not a conservative vs liberal issue. I respect your opinions (except when you are a smart-***

keithseeker, you are glossing over everything with a very broad brush. You are taking a position which basically claims that since everyone has screwed up and everyone is to blame, who cares about the details it's all just a big clusterfuck mess anyway. Well, the devil is in the details, and that is why you should be taking a closer examination. <br><br />
<br><br />
Blaming congress is a nice start. I already dealt with those criticisms of what exactly congress did in regards to enabling the president in this so called 'war'. You never responded to any of it. <br><br />
<br><br />
As for people being pissed at congress, again there are more pesky details. Are you familiar with the term "do-nothing congress?" People are upset with congress because they don't perceive them as fixing some major problems, like withdrawing from Iraq even though a huge majority of Americans want us to pull out. Take a look at this page and you'll understand why our congress "does nothing" and why they enjoy an approval rating lower than Bush's:<br><br />
<br><br /><br><br />
<br><br />
Don't you see you are a victim of a deliberate strategy aimed at increasing apathy towards government? One of the staples of conservative politicians is that government doesn't work, it's all incompetence and greed and corruption. Why elect a governing body of people who hate government and think it cannot help people, that is should just stay out of the way? It's a self-fulfilling prophecy. "I say Government sucks. Elect me and I'll prove it" I mean are you serious?

MrsTJ- calling someone ignorant of an issue is often taken as an insult, but it shouldn't be. It simply means you are not aware of something, maybe you have a busy life and not enough time to pay attention to politics. That is no sin. It's not an attack on you, if anything, it's an attack on the media that is suppose to inform the public on what is going on. The fact that most of America is unaware (ignorant) of the torture policy of the US under Bush is a huge failure of the media.

whuttup: I never condoned torture! i never ever said i think it is okay to torture people. i never really hear about the issue, so i wouldnt necessarily call myself ignorant. maybe naive of the issue???? do you want to attack me anymore or are you done now?

Again whuttup miss the point of the original post. I have never said I am a Bush fan but this story has nothing to do with Bush. I do not agree with the policies that Obama stands for. I do not agree with a Congress that has let down the American people (both Democrats and Republicans). I guess my concern is that Bush has been blamed for everything that has happened in the last eight years. Most of the issues were in play before he was even elected. He did not act alone on a vast majority of the problems. How about focusing on all of those issues? Did Bush do some stupid things? Yes he did...just like every other President before him. Is Bush easy to pick on? Of course he is for a variety of reasons.<br />
Reality is that no matter who was elected they would still face the same problems. The President does not operate in a vacuum as many in here like to think (and yes there are so many Bush jokes from that statement Since Obama is surrounding his self with the Washington insiders...where is the change he promised? Beside the Gitmo issue...where is the real change? Yes it is early in his term but his team clearly indicates where he is as usual.

Keithseeker- Comments on Bush are called for on any story within the group 'Barack Obama is Dangerous for this country'. Anyone who thinks Obama is dangerous has not been paying attention to what Bush the imperialistic president has been up to these last two terms. <br />
<br />
Good day.

So poodledoole..what mis-information am I spreading? It is clear you are so anti-Bush that you cannot see beyond that issue. I have never said that I am a fan of Bush. Reality is that our current mess does not rest solely on his shoulders. Congress got us to where we are now and this goes back decades. The main focus of the story has nothing to do with Bush. However, you have to take the opportunity to attack people who question if Obama focused too much on change. Get a

MrsTJ: Earlier you dismissed it - so either you are completely unaware of what your country has been doing, or you ARE aware of it and are not outraged. In either case, you are condoning it, whether through ignorance or ambivalence.


Lilianne, In this world there will always be half glass empty kind of people. I support our president and his optimism, optimism and hope is not for everyone.

MrsTJ, I cannot begin to imagine how hard it is to have a spouse over in Iraq. I won't change my opinion of anyone associated with the military condoning torture, though. <br />
<br />
I watched the signing this morning, he signed 4 executive orders. If I remember correctly, the first one was to begin the process to close Gitmo, to be completed by this time next year at the latest. Second one was to outlaw torture, and to resort only to the Army field manual for interrogation techniques. Third one was to create a commission of top military commanders to review and oversee how we handle enemy combatants and recommend any needed changes to the President. The fourth order was to postpone a trial of a particular enemy combatant. <br />
<br />
The commission that will review our interrogation techniques could recommend, in theory, the same enhanced interrogation techniques that were in place under Rumsfeld & Cheney, and this is cause for concern to those of us who don't want any gray area when it comes to torture. I don't personally see a problem with it, however, because that commission is made up of the same military brass that just got done begging Obama to end our approval of torture. I don't see them doing an about face and suddenly getting behind waterboarding or anything like that. <br />
<br />
After that Obama had a conference at the State department (remember them? Almost irrelevant during the past 8 years since Bush didn't care about diplomacy) and there they appointed a few very capable men to work on the Israel/Palestine clusterfuck. These were the same people that were successful in ending the conflict in Northern Ireland between the catholics and protestants, so maybe, just maybe, they can make progress in the Gaza *****. <br />
<br />
Like Tzech said, a lot happened on day 2. Hope is a good thing.

no i dont like to watch the news

hmmm. just wondering if you checked the news for day two. change has already begun. perhaps just not what some would expect.

thank you and i misunderstood what someone said about the torture thing. i took it as something els.e sorrry.

I second poodledoodle's thanks and wishes for you, too, MrsTJ. I am sure it is very hard having your love so far away. My prayers are with you, with him, and with all the men and women who are serving. May they all come home safe.

Since you have stated repeatedly that you ARE a military wife, I think it a bit late to complain that someone calls you one. I am quite sure that whattup, as OGND stated too, was expressing legitimate concern for ALL people in the military who might be subject to torture! Senator McCain was also opposed to torture for this very reason -- if we use it, it will be used against us.<br />
<br />
Of course the problems that we have in this country today cannot be solved in 4-years. But change has to begin somewhere! And it is beginning now, with this new administration. Our foreign policy should become more nuanced and reasonable, our economic policies more equitable, our social policies more humane.

I would be generous and assume that he was expressing a fear for you rather than a condemnation. Your husband's profession puts him at a greater risk of capture and torture himself. If you cannot see a problem in a government (any government) sanctioning torture, then I am personally afraid that you may have to reap that whirlwind one day. :( Sorry, hun.

whuttup, i dont think you should be questioning me as a military wife.

Whuutup: pointing out that other Presidents have done similar things in the past isn't a rationalization: sorry if it came across that way. I was just stating fact. It doesn't make Bush's actions any more reasonable or moral or legal.<br />
<br />
See, that's the great thing about the US system of government: just because the government does something, that doesn't automatically make it legal. Nixon tried that argument of Executive privilege and effectively failed (even though he too got off scot free).<br />
<br />
My point is that Bush only got to do all the horrible things he did because other people let him. Once upon a time we impeached a President, just for firing a member of his own cabinet! That's how much power Congress used to afford the Executive. If one branch of government tramples on the Constitution, then it is the responsibility the other branches to stop them. That simply didn't happen in this case - and that was really, REALLY wrong.<br />
<br />
I think it's too convenient to lay all of the blame at Bush's feet alone. You've simply cut one head off a hydra - there are a lot more heads to go.

Don't get me started on executive privilege... they try to use that to excuse any action.

As for "finishing the job"... what exactly does that utopian fantasy look like? So far we have succeeded only in toppling a dictator and unleashing a power vacuum that has torn Iraq apart. Iraq was ruled by a dictator, but at least they were secular and functioning. Most Iraqis that became "insurgents" did so because their society was completely destroyed by our benevolent invasion. Forget going to work, they could no longer leave their house. And now we have a power struggle between the Kurds, Shia and Sunni factions, and that great democratic government that Bush points to is now a theocracy. <br />
<br />
What does your version of "Mission Accomplished" look like?

Fine, MrsTJ you can say that you think Barack is going to be a bad president, though given our last president I'm not sure how anyone could claim that he could ever reach Bush's ineptitude. Everyone gets an opinion, even if that opinion is amazingly vacant of justification. Obama has already done more good in his first 2 days than Bush has managed in his 2nd term. <br />
<br />
Keithseeker, congress never voted to go to war. There is no war. It's an occupation. Who do you think Congress declared war on? Iraq? No, sorry, we're not at war with Iraq. We're trying to instill a puppet government there. Also, you can't declare war on a word, so there is no "War on terror" as our amazing ex-president would have most of America believe. The war on terror is a slogan, not an act of congress. <br />
<br />
Congress voted to give the commander in chief the authorization to use force, something that he would only do as a last resort based on rock solid evidence...right? Hahahaha. They were hoodwinked by Powell and his drawings of mobile weapons labs, some of the SUPERB intelligence that we gathered through torture. On top of that, we also learned, through torture, that Iraq had a connection to Al-Qaida. Turns out that information was as reliable as all information obtained through torture, meaning 'not very'. Ask John McCain if torture will make you tell the truth or tell your captors anything to make them stop. <br />
<br />
The cost for our occupation-of-a-country-that-didn't-attack-us is not even part of our federal budget. Every dollar that's been spent in Iraq has come from special appropriations bills, sort of an emergency fund. A "temporary" emergency that has gone on for 5 years...and if McCain had won it could have stretched off into the horizon, since he didn't see any big deal with us being there a hundred years from now. <br />
<br />
To those of you who rationalize Bush's actions vs. past presidents and that somehow makes it less horrible, you're ignoring some inconvenient facts. No presidency in our history has sought to consolidate executive power as much as Bush/Cheney. They believe in the unitary executive, which is a concept that is so un-american it should make everyone vomit. Cheney's view (and therefore Bush's) is that the President does not need to defer power to the other branches of government. Signing statements, anyone? Yes, other presidents have used signing statements in isolated circumstances. Any idea of how many times Bush has signed laws with his fingers metaphorically crossed, in effect saying "yes I'm signing this law but I don't necessarily have to OBEY this law, I'm the unitary executive."<br />
<br />
It sickens me to see a military wife shrug off torture like it's not such a big deal.

Tell your husband that some in this country are grateful to him and you for your sacrifice. We are thankful that we have brave men and women who don't just sit at home and spout off about how much they know. As for Obama, I pray for him, but see I'm one of those gun toting folks who doesn't think they should sit and do their nails while others blow them up.

How true. :) Once again, it's a matter of personal conscience. Respect for the Executive office is necessary if the military is going to function properly. However, freedom of personal conscience is necessary if AMERICA is going to function properly.<br />
<br />
I think Wraither raised a good point: Mrs. TJ is effectively only saying what Obama has already said himself. So there's nothing to be so afraid of! Hehehe...