Hear This Barack - NO Bush, NO Baker, NO Corporate War Maker!

[HomerRamone]

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/16064

Hear This Barack - NO Bush, NO Baker, NO Corporate War Maker! We've Had Enough!
By Linda Milazzo

Some men sacrificed their sons for their nation. George Herbert Walker Bush sacrificed his nation for his son.

In a July 15th appearance on CNN's Larry King Live, Barack Obama announced that as President he would seek the foreign policy counsel of former President Bill Clinton, former President George Herbert Walker Bush, former Bush Sr. Secretary of State, James Baker, former Bush Sr. National Security Advisor, Brent Scowcroft, and former George W. Bush Secretary of State, Colin Powell.

<...>

One would think that Barack Obama, in his quest for "change," would understand that the Bushes and the loyalists from their administrations should no longer serve in our government. Surprisingly, Senator Obama does not. Rather than taking the reins and leading a Bush-free nation, Obama plans to involve Bush cronies James Baker, Brent Scowcroft and Colin Powell in his own administration. Baker, former Secretary of State to George Herbert Walker Bush, was the architect of George W's theft of the 2000 election. An odious distinction. But for me, General Powell, former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is the most egregious of all Bush enablers. I hold him more responsible for the Iraq war and the deaths of Americans and Iraqis than anyone other than George W. Bush and Dick Cheney. As a General, Powell knew NOT to make false claims that could lead to military action. Nevertheless he did so before the United Nations.

<...>

Bill Clinton does have extraordinary global connections. Unfortunately, they are mostly corporate, since giant corporations are the core of his organization, the Clinton Global Initiative. Like Bush Sr., Baker and Powell, Clinton represents failed policies. He instituted NAFTA. He didn't produce a healthcare program. He ended the AFDC program (Aid To Families With Dependent Children) that assisted poor families with children. When Bill Clinton ended welfare in 1996, I was working with Community Based Organizations throughout Los Angeles. I spent hours in meetings grappling with the plight of poor mothers who were thrown into minimum wage jobs with no childcare. Now, a dozen years later, I believe that the high numbers of unwed teen parents, school dropouts, drug abusers and prison inmates correlate directly with the thousands of children who raised themselves alone thanks to Clinton's legislation. His political expediency and capitulation to then Republican Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich, paved the way for today's burgeoning prison industrial complex, failed education system, and even the childhood obesity Clinton is determined to correct. Without mothers to prepare home meals, children subsisted on fast food and junk food with little nutrition. I refer you to Robert Scheer's excellent analysis of how Clinton ended welfare - but failed to end poverty: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060829_robert_scheer_clinton_welfare/

<...>

Obama's pandering is obvious. He's pandering to Republicans by naming Republican advisors. He's pandering to AIPAC by ignoring Carter. Pandering is NOT the change we can believe in!

[vaberella]

1. Do I dare shout PUMA?! Because the last line is reminiscint of their talking points.

~sigh~ You people don't rest.

[HomerRamone]

2. I don't know what PUMA means.

All I know is that I read the Smirking Chimp every day, and when I heard (on an embedded video) Barack say he wanted to use JAMES FUCKING BAKER, I got fed up...

[vaberella]

4. He didn't say he wanted to use James Baker...and this is how things are misconstrued

He said he thought Bill Clinton would be a great advisor and complimented Bill on his foreign policy team whom he saw were great thinkers. Keep in mind these people would never be where they were if they were not great minds. Even if you don't like what they do or did. But Obama never said he would use James Baker. An off handed compliment to the former president bill Clinton with mention of his team which was being discussed is completely different from what the facts may be.

You're jumping to conclusions because you obviously WANT to dislike Obama for something but I heard nothing in his statement that would make me lose faith even if JB is supportive of McCain.

Exactly what Obama said for James Baker he continously complimented McCain, that doesn't mean McCain would be veep if you get my meaning.

Take it in context.

You may claim not to know what or whom PUMA is but you sure do act sound like them.

[HomerRamone]

5. And you sound like "if you disagree with me you're a terrorist". nt

I don't WANT to dislike Obams. Who the hell are you, a fascist?

[vaberella]

10. Saying, "That's not change we can believe in," in regards to comment

where he does no such promotion of a person as though it's set in fact that he does want James Bark is what I'm disagreeing with.
I heard the clipping and read the article. I think you're incorrectly reading what Obama stated, which was no promotion of JB, however he directly complimented Clinton. If complimenting the guy as saying he's a formidable mind a bad thing I don't see how. He never said he'd bring him on his team, he never even said he'd take the guys advice although he'd hear out Clinton.

My main concern is you stating that he's in some way lieing and changing his game and consorting with the enemy.

That's not the case, further more, as I stated before I felt the video you watched was interpreted incorrectly.

[Bluenorthwest]

7. You people?

God I hate that phrase. I guess you dig James Baker? Do you think he should be VP? Or do you think Oabma should just keep Cheney to save on the moving expenses?
The author of the posting on Smirking Chimp is a well known person. An anti-Bush activist, not a pro-Bush apologist. A Democratic progressive.

[vaberella]

8. Get over yourself. I never said the author of the article. I said it to the poster.

My post was directly to the poster and no one else.

[HomerRamone]

13. So the author is acceptable but quoting her is not.

Sorry, I won't goosestep behind Obama or anybody else. I'll vote Dem yet again, but if this is another Republican Lite administration, merely shifting locales for bloodshed, it will be the last time I will do so...

[fasttense]

3. Obama's policy changes are Nothing compared to panda bear McCain.

Obama will govern like a liberal. We will make sure of it. McCain will govern like an idiot. The republicons will make sure of it.

I love this line: "Some men sacrificed their sons for their nation. George Herbert Walker Bush sacrificed his nation for his son."

[kenny blankenship]

6. Presidents consult former Presidents on foreign policy, they just do that

After all their predecessors know where the bodies are buried. Kennedy consulted Eisenhower at various times, we know, from tapes he kept of their conversations. Nixon probably called Johnson whenever there were Oval Office doldrums to threaten him about that "Bay of Pigs Thing". Obama will want to know from G. H. W. Bush what to expect from the Saudis: this Sheik is into role playing and will want you to dress up, that Oil Minister is a full on sadist and will not stop until he draws blood and dislocates something, that sort of thing.

[anonymous171]

9. I wasn't aware that BC and his cabinet were all republicans?

I want a president who gets shit done and governs effectively. I don't care what kind of adviser he has to hire. We are going to need all the help we can get.

[vaberella]

11. Obama has said roughly the same as well.

I get the feeling his cabinet may be made up of Repubs.

[muryan]

12. Give it a rest

Clean the foam from the corners of your mouth and breathe.

Why the hell would he ignore people with many years of experience when it comes to certain foreign or domestic issues? It doesn't mean he is going to follow their advice, he knows their faults just as well as the rest of us.

If his cabinet is made up completely of democrats, ill be pretty surprised and disappointed.