Posted by: thescoundrel | February 2, 2008

Barack Obama Agent of Change Stagnancy


Barack Obama the 2008 candidate running as the agent of change continues to prove otherwise. Like many other Democrat and Republican non/agents of change serving in the SCOTUS, Obama has a crisis cloud of corruption hanging over his head. His current personal crisis happens to be the Rezko Trial. He also surrounds himself with agents of stagnancy like Ted Kennedy. And now he has become the MoveOn.Org POTUS Poster Child candidate. The same MoveOn who demeaned a serving General with a treasonous ad accusation for performing his duty as asked by a setting President and Congress. I can only assume that Obama is thrilled by this sponsorship as he has remained as silent as his previous silent avoidance in congressionally condemning that same group, for their General Betrayus accusation, by exercising another one of his now famous non-votes. At least the other Democrat candidate for POTUS, Hillary Clinton, had the cojones to vote no and take the public flack. With his choice of political alignments Obama continues to display that he is no agent of change, but just another in a long line of agents of stagnancy.

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Fun with Candidates Names

  2. scoundrel,
    You deny the obvious change right in front of you. The reaction of the American public to both Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton, in money given, rallies attended and votes in the caucuses and primaries, shows how much the public wants change. These huge numbers shows how many Americans want an end to almost everything that has been happening for the last 7 years in the federal government — the waste, mismanagement and corruption, the war in Iraq, preemptive wars, an arrogant, go-it-alone foreign policy, refusal to even acknowledge much less do something about climate change, politicization of justice and sheer ineptitude in handling national security.
    That is the change that Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton are talking about — a change that we will all be a part of. This groundswell of change cannot be threatened or detered by any perceived or real lack of perfection in its leaders. They, with any faults they have and along with the rest of the country, are going to be swept up and along with this tidal wave of change.
    Scoundrel, if you want to convince yourself and your readers that Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton do not represent and will not bring change, you will have to do more than talk about their personal histories and backgrounds. You will have to explain away the public’s reaction to them in money given, rallies attended and votes given thus far.

  3. Yeah, I was pretty steamed about the MoveOn.org endorsement—-how dare those left-wackdoos endorse MY candidate! 😀

    Seriously though, from my POV I don’t see this as a plus for Obama, but I guess the extremists had no other choice after Edwards dropped out.

  4. Maybe, QCEX, but then you do not hear Obama trying to distance himself. Hence it says he is the extremist he claims he is not. If you have not you should try the “Fun with candidates” link above. It is someone translating the candidates names into Chinese. Makes me glad I am not a Chinese interpreter and trying to explain the name changes.
    😆

  5. I have never doubted the publics desire for change Dave. I have been talking of change long before I ever started blogging, and longer than Bush 2 has been in office. This countries problem with change is that we seek change but we do not have change options available. We simple always have two extreme swings of the pendulum to choose from. Bush 2, who so many of you hate, ran as an agent of change. As did Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter both were ineffective Presidents. Both were extremely popular when they rode into the Whitehouse on their platforms of change. It has gotten so old of a pitch that there is always a candidate running against a sitting President that now runs as a reform candidate. Obama claims to be a current agent of change. My post stated Obama is no agent of change, he is simply more of the same “reform” candidates that hide in the sheep clothing of agent of change. I cannot make anyone react, that is something everyone does quite often, and we react without looking past our gut feelings of anger. Anger at Johnson, vote in Nixon. Anger at Nixon vote in Carter. Anger at Carter vote in Reagan. And on and on we simply follow the same pattern. All I can do is present the facts people have to rely on themselves as to how they react to those facts. But when you look at the facts of what Obama surrounds himself with, and not with the anger pointed at Bush, Obama is not an agent of change, but simply another in a long line of wolfen reform candidates lurking for shot inside the sheep pen.

  6. You said it. Barack cant even change his circle of friends. He surrounds himself with corrupt Rezkos and Ted Kennedys (he called him too old) on you tube btw.

    If he is such a spineless hobo, how can he change things for the better. As far as change goes, George bush changed things too – for the worse.

    In obama, there is noting in there if you look close enough.

  7. I have an easy litmus test for a candidate. If they mention “Roll back the tax cuts,” or want to raise my taxes, I won’t vote for them.

    Jeff


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: