Obama's Flip-Flops..er.."Evolution."

[dre]

Have different facts and scenarios changed?

Obama has an ideological bent that has been consistent. He has stated things that he says he believes in but does not at all agree with, entirely for political gain. The above flip-flops are a demonstration of this. In other words he is willing to lie about his stance and misrepresent himself. He knows that American people do not in general hold socialist ideology to be workable in the long term and are more about individual initiative, freedom and liberty so he mitigates his ideological stand hoping to push as much government on the people as he can while holding up "American values" as sacrosanct until the laws are changed.

Obama doesnt hold a socialist ideology either. As for what "American people" think, they are pretty similar to any other social democracy.

Have different facts and scenarios changed?

Sure. Its easy to make all kinds of promises while you campaign, but once you are actually in office you are constrained by reality. Obama campaigned on a public UHC style healthcare system for example and won... and he campaigned against an individual mandate. Once he was actually president though those things were simply not doable. The congress and senate were not going to pass them so he had to compromise.

This same scenario holds true for all kinds of presidential campaign promises. They like to talk a big game during their election but once in office they realize that the president does not make the laws OR control the purse strings so they are forced to make concessions.

You are extremely naive about how politics even works Pliny. Im not even defending Obama... hes been a run of the mill corporate shill that has government about the same as every other administration since Iv been alive. But you live in a fantasy world.

[dre]

Once on a trip to Italy we took a 3 day road trip and tried to pack in as much as possible. At times, we literally pulled over for 5 minutes and took some pics and left. I was joking that my camera needs to capture the time of day as well as the date.

That trip kind of reminds me of Romney's flip-flops. Unlike a real evolution in ideas which take years or decades (heck, I've evolved as well on some issues), you have to read the news on a daily basis to see where Romney stands on an issue. You'll notice that Obama hasn't done anything of the sort, even in the examples you gave.

That's the problem for Romney, Shady. It's not that he changed his opinion, it's that he did it on a daily basis. Which means he has no values, he just wants to say anything that will get him elected.

I dont really think that critisism is any more fair for Romney than it is for Obama. Look... this is the political game! When youre campaigning you get up there and say what your researchers tell you people want to hear or you dont win. The system is DESIGNED for people of uncompromising principle to get elected.

All these same arguments could be made about every single president since confederation.

[BC_chick]

I dont really think that critisism is any more fair for Romney than it is for Obama. Look... this is the political game! When youre campaigning you get up there and say what your researchers tell you people want to hear or you dont win. The system is DESIGNED for people of uncompromising principle to get elected.

All these same arguments could be made about every single president since confederation.

For sure, Obama played it safe with things like SSM because that's what all polictians are supposed to do, I won't argue otherwise.

But I'm talking about something different here, I'm talking about the way Romney changed his platform on a daily basis. Obama changed his position on several things throughout his term, but other than including God and Jersualem in the Democratic platform he did not change his stance once throughout this campaign on any specific issue.

It's one thing to play it safe with the voters, it's a whole other thing to change your mind ever second day. At least with Obama the voters have a certain level of trust whether or not they support the same position.

Romney? Not at all. Even his supporters have no idea what kind of a presidency he would offer. They just don't like Obama.

[Pliny]

Obama doesnt hold a socialist ideology either. As for what "American people" think, they are pretty similar to any other social democracy.

Sorry he does. Perhaps not as left as you though, comrade. Oh yes "American people are pretty similar to any other social democracies like ....ummmm....France.... and even Canada.....Barack Obama could be Prime Minister for life here. No. You have no idea. America is the last bastion of freedom and when it falls, if you are still around, you may recognize that.

Sure. Its easy to make all kinds of promises while you campaign, but once you are actually in office you are constrained by reality. Obama campaigned on a public UHC style healthcare system for example and won... and he campaigned against an individual mandate. Once he was actually president though those things were simply not doable. The congress and senate were not going to pass them so he had to compromise.

This same scenario holds true for all kinds of presidential campaign promises. They like to talk a big game during their election but once in office they realize that the president does not make the laws OR control the purse strings so they are forced to make concessions.

You are extremely naive about how politics even works Pliny. Im not even defending Obama... hes been a run of the mill corporate shill that has government about the same as every other administration since Iv been alive. But you live in a fantasy world.

Get the idea dre, of what a flip flop is and what a campaign promise is. A flip-flop is taking the opposite position of what was originally stated. A campaign promise may not come to fruition but it only becomes a flip flop when the opposite of what was promised is attempted to be accomplished. GHWB flip-flopped on his tax policy. He increased taxes when he said he wouldn't. Reagan said he would get rid of the DEA. He never did but that wasn't a flip-flop - it was a campaign promise.

You sound intelligent but I get the feeling you are on autopilot.

[Pliny]

Once on a trip to Italy we took a 3 day road trip and tried to pack in as much as possible. At times, we literally pulled over for 5 minutes and took some pics and left. I was joking that my camera needs to capture the time of day as well as the date.

That trip kind of reminds me of Romney's flip-flops. Unlike a real evolution in ideas which take years or decades (heck, I've evolved as well on some issues), you have to read the news on a daily basis to see where Romney stands on an issue. You'll notice that Obama hasn't done anything of the sort, even in the examples you gave.

That's the problem for Romney, Shady. It's not that he changed his opinion, it's that he did it on a daily basis. Which means he has no values, he just wants to say anything that will get him elected.

Yes of course, Romney changed his opinion on a daily basis. Have you complied a list of his varying opinions and flip-flops like Shady has of Obama's flip-flops. I'd love to read that.

[betsy]

Dre:

Obama doesnt hold a socialist ideology either.

<singsong>

The fan is in denial. The fan is in denial.

Comparing Obama's Policies with French Socialist Hollande

Reject austerity and embrace “growth.” The first thing Hollande stresses is that he will end the current austerity efforts imposed by outgoing President Nicolas Sarkozy and the European Union. However, as Mercatus Center (George Mason University) economist Veronique de Rugy has pointed out, France hasn’t cut spending — at all. French government spending has grown every year from 2002 (€816 billion) to 2011 (€1.1 trillion). To paraphrase Shakespeare, austerity should be made of sterner stuff.

That’s important because Obama has accused House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and his House-passed budget of “social Darwinism,” apparently meaning it is so austere that it would leave millions of helpless Americans to fend for themselves — or what we used to call taking “personal responsibility.” In fact, government spending under Ryan’s budget grows every year — just not enough for the White House.

Hollande promises not only to end the austerity but to embrace growth. But again, it’s all in the definition. Hollande’s “growth” is Euro-speak (or Obama-speak) for increased government spending and hiring more government employees — what leftists consider “real jobs.” He wants €20 billion in new spending over five years. He also proposes hiring 60,000 new teachers, 1,000 police a year, and addresses youth unemployment by creating 150,000 state-aided jobs.

Raise taxes on the rich: Both candidates claim they can make the rich pay for their brand of economic growth.

Raise the dividends tax: In his 2013 budget, Obama proposed raising the dividend tax rate from 15 percent to the highest personal income tax rate, 39.6 percent next year. Add in those phased-out deductions mentioned above and the 3.8 percent investment tax surcharge, and you have a tax rate of nearly 45 percent — right up there with socialist Hollande.

Hollande has also proposed increasing the dividends tax, reversing tax breaks for the rich and introducing new taxes, all of which he thinks will bring in an extra €29 billion.

Crack down on the financial and oil industries: President Obama can hardly give a speech without bashing the oil industry. He keeps misleading — that’s the nicest word I can use here — the public by asserting that the oil industry gets special tax breaks that he wants to eliminate. However, while the oil and gas industry does get some tax breaks, those breaks are available to all companies engaged in certain manufacturing efforts.

Promote renewable energy projects: Both Obama and Hollande want to prime the green energy pump with taxpayer dollars.

Increase public subsidies to small businesses: President Obama has already tried to buy small business votes by providing a tax credit to offset the cost of health insurance. Only problem is that very few businesses took advantage of the money. Now he wants to pass a tax credit that will offset new hires.

There are many more areas of similarity, but you get the point. Obama economic policies are almost identical to those of the French socialist François Hollande. Those policies haven’t worked in Greece or in any other place where they’ve been tried — like the U.S. And they won’t work in France.

Refusing to learn from economic history, Hollande’s policies will fail. Then he can take another queue from Obama — he can just blame his predecessor, Nicolas Sarkozy … or was it George Bush?

http://www.forbes.co...ist-hollande/2/

Edited October 30, 2012 by betsy

[Pliny]

<singsong>

The fan is in denial. The fan is in denial.

http://www.forbes.co...ist-hollande/2/

<singsong>

The fan is in denial. The fan is in denial.

dre is not really a fan of Obama. Obama isn't quite far left enough for his tastes. But all things considered dre views himself a centrist. So where does that put Obama? Obviously, he's a right winger.